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

Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

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

  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

    Originally posted by intridcold View Post
    Duncan stays four year at WAke Forest.

    2 Yeasr ago he signed an extension for less than he is clearly worth.

    I don't see many players making those decisons to commit to an organization that commits to them.

    So should we expect it?

    If we happen to get Mayo, Beasley, or Rose we always run the risk of losing them like the Cavs run the risk of losing LeBron.

    Mayo would still have to show case his worth to get a contract to leave. So for 4 years he would have to commit or jeopardize his career Gerald Green style.

    More players take cash than what is reported.
    The whole thing about Mayo is this the NBA is a league of star players. Kobe, Lebron will make the playoffs and get call year in and year out. It the Pacers draft at 3 and Beasely/Rose are gone we should take a strong look at Mayo. He has more star power than Lopez & Bayless. Imagine the story lines Mayo vs Lebron. It will get attention. Is it the right choice (Who Knows) but we need a superstar and Granger is not that star!

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

      Originally posted by d_c View Post


      The NCAA's rules about this stuff are so old, antiquated, out of date and out of touch that I have a hard time taking them seriously when they talk about these "violations". What a joke it is that they talk like that.
      I agree 100% remember when Majerus got in trouble for buying players some pizza. Hell 95% of the highschool's in Indiana would get in trouble for this. The rules only hurt the team's after a player/coach leaves look at Indiana University right now!!

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

        Some people just don't pay attention to what's coming out of the Pacers offices.

        The Pacers won't draft Mayo, especially now!

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

          Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
          The whole thing about Mayo is this the NBA is a league of star players. Kobe, Lebron will make the playoffs and get call year in and year out. It the Pacers draft at 3 and Beasely/Rose are gone we should take a strong look at Mayo. He has more star power than Lopez & Bayless. Imagine the story lines Mayo vs Lebron. It will get attention. Is it the right choice (Who Knows) but we need a superstar and Granger is not that star!
          PG and C are more important positions and higher needs for this team so I could see Bayless or Lopez at 3.

          But I could see Mayo at 3 as well as I agree on his star potential. These recent news developments do bother me.

          Bayless and Lopez will both be very good, but you're right in that Mayo's ceiling I think is higher. Mayo's stock is high so I could see a trade back with a team like NY who would love him though I think NY needs a PG worse than us. Send them Tinsley in the trade back?

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

            Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
            Some people just don't pay attention to what's coming out of the Pacers offices.

            The Pacers won't draft Mayo, especially now!
            I'm not so sure. Yes, I'm well aware of what the Pacers are saying, but what if their investigation of Mayo reveals that, despite his reputation, he's actually OK? I wouldn't be shocked if they took him in that scenario.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

              You have got to be kidding me; if the Pacers have a chance to draft Ovinton J'Anthony (with B-Easy and Rose off the board), they do it. If they don't, they're fools, straight up.

              My sentiments are the same as yours rexnom.
              You Got The Tony!!!!!!

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                And what if Mayo thought he was working within the bounderies, which Johnson himself says in the ESPN report, and just thought that he was being asked to promise to sign with an agent in the future? A "look son, sign here and we can make things good for you, we can't risk violations but there are edges we can work in good faith".

                The player thinks this is a fair deal, you aren't being paid to go to USC you are being paid to choose a specific agent in the future but can't actually do it now because of violation restrictions.

                And the violation alleged is mean to protect Mayo from these types of parasites, not to protect society or the integrity of the NCAA game. This is not a USC booster pushing money to Mayo.

                I'm not saying dismiss it, I'm saying look further than just the word of ONE GUY (Johnson, now on the outs of the Mayo camp), and also consider if Mayo was the criminal or the victim when you hear that he saw perhaps $30k of some $200K+ funneled in their direction (according to Johnson).

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                  Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                  . . . and also consider if Mayo was the criminal or the victim when you hear that he saw perhaps $30k of some $200K+ funneled in their direction (according to Johnson).
                  Criminal! If true, thirty thousand dollars is too much money for me to believe Mayo didn't know what was going on. That's more money than a lot of people make in a year.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                    I do not think accepting money while in college hurts your nba draft value. OJ Mayo will be a top five pick in this years draft. Let's take a look at USC; this is the second scandel ie Reggie Bush. I saw the outside the lines last night (late) but wasnt this Johnson guy in trouble for selling or possessing cocaine? He probably ran in OJ's entourage & just found out he was not going to get his cut; then he comes in with this story to create scandel to hurt OJ. He is a jealous mother sucker and everything wrong with college sports not OJ. Go back in the day to when you were 18 ;if a three hundred lb girls was offering you a flat screen to have sex wl her would you?

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                      Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                      Criminal! If true, thirty thousand dollars is too much money for me to believe Mayo didn't know what was going on. That's more money than a lot of people make in a year.
                      $30K is also way, way less than the amount of revenue he generated for USC and the NCAA.

                      And Reggie Bush? The NCAA and USC made an absolute killing off of that guy. Whatever money/gifts/mansions Bush got, he earned. Hell, the guy was severly underpaid at USC as far as I'm concerned.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                        Originally posted by d_c View Post
                        $30K is also way, way less than the amount of revenue he generated for USC and the NCAA.
                        That has nothing to do with Mayo breaking the rules.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                          For one the issue is not whether the rule is wrong. The issue is whether or not Mayo and co. were in violation of any rule.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=00gbhG0zA5k

                            What do you think of Goran Pragic as our PG pick in the second round?

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                              Originally posted by intridcold View Post
                              For one the issue is not whether the rule is wrong. The issue is whether or not Mayo and co. were in violation of any rule.
                              Who's issue is it? It's USC's issue. It's their problem.

                              It's not going to be an issue for Mayo or the NBA team the spends a top 5 pick on him. It's going to be a total non-issue. As if the team that drafts him is going to care about what happens to USC.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...

                                Another interesting article from Chad Ford.

                                http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...ftWatch-080512

                                Draft Watch: Odds now favor Rose as No. 1 pick, not Beasley

                                By Chad Ford
                                ESPN.com




                                In 2007, one question dominated the months before the NBA draft: Who is the No. 1 player in the draft?
                                Greg Oden, a once-in-a-decade center prospect?
                                Or Kevin Durant, who had been arguably the most productive freshman in the history of college basketball?
                                After more than a month of deliberation, the Portland Trail Blazers decided to take Oden with the top pick.
                                This year, again, the focus is on two players.
                                The consensus two months ago was that Kansas State forward Michael Beasley was, far and away, the likely choice for the No. 1 pick.
                                Beasley had a freshman season that, in almost every way, was even more impressive than Durant's. He ended the season as the country's leading rebounder and one of its top scorers -- impressive feats for an 18-year-old freshman playing in an elite conference such as the Big 12.


                                Beasley, a 6-foot-10 power forward, has the physical tools and basketball skills to be a great NBA player. He's a prolific scorer both inside and outside, with elite athleticism, great range on his jump shot, the power to bang in the paint, the speed to run the break and the nastiness to mix it up down low -- with the cockiness to think that he can deliver a victory for his team every night.
                                But a late charge by Memphis point guard Derrick Rose has dramatically changed the game. Rose, not Beasley, was a dominant force in the NCAA tournament, putting on a performance that would've garnered him MOP honors for the tournament had Memphis not blown a late second-half lead in the championship game versus Kansas.
                                Rose is considered a cross between Chris Paul and Deron Williams, with excellent size, athleticism and leadership abilities. The lack of a consistent jump shot is the only real mark against him.
                                In the last 20 years, only one player shorter than 6-6 -- Allen Iverson -- has ever gone No. 1. When in doubt, NBA GMs almost always opt for a big man. However, as we watch point guards such as Paul, Williams and Tony Parker dominate in the playoffs, the thinking is beginning to change. It's no longer considered a given that a big man is the key to winning in the NBA.
                                Over the past few months, I've talked to scouts and/or executives from almost every team in the draft lottery in an effort to determine what each would do with the No. 1 pick. Some were open, while some refused to answer.
                                With character questions still swirling around Beasley, and Rose gaining stock in the eyes of NBA front-office decision-makers, Beasley is no longer the favorite to be the No. 1 pick -- and he has dropped to No. 2 on our Top 100.
                                With about a week to go before the NBA draft lottery, Rose has emerged as the most likely candidate for the No. 1 pick.
                                The race remains close: We're projecting seven lottery teams opting for Rose and seven for Beasley. But if you break down the likelihood of each team's landing the No. 1 pick, it's a landslide for Rose. According to our latest intel, Rose has a 66.3 percent chance of becoming the No. 1 pick -- up dramatically from the 10.5 percent chance we gave him in March.
                                Here's the team-by-team breakdown:





                                Miami Heat

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 25 percent In March, all indications were that Beasley would be the man for Miami. He would be a big upgrade over Udonis Haslem and, alongside Dwyane Wade and Shawn Marion, would give the Heat a formidable trio of athletes on the floor.
                                However, word out of Miami right now is that Pat Riley has fallen head over heels for Rose and believes that a backcourt of Wade and Rose would be the most explosive in the NBA.
                                Edge: Rose






                                Seattle SuperSonics

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 19.9 percent In March, we were salivating over the idea that the Sonics could land both Durant and Beasley in back-to-back years. A few of the GMs I spoke with thought it would be an amazing combination. Beasley and Durant are close friends and, together, they could give the Sonics the most potent inside-outside, young scoring duo in the league.
                                However, the Sonics, too, have become enamored with Rose, and a source close to the team said the idea of matching an elite point guard next to Durant would be too good to pass up.
                                Edge: Rose






                                Minnesota Timberwolves

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 13.8 percent The Wolves need a franchise point guard more than they need a franchise power forward. Al Jefferson is having an All-Star-caliber season, but Sebastian Telfair is easily replaceable.
                                However, the Wolves would likely opt for Beasley. Jefferson can move to the center position if Beasley comes on board. And the Wolves still believe that Randy Foye will eventually be the team's point guard.
                                If I were Kevin McHale, I'd go with Rose. But, since McHale almost always gets this wrong come June, we'll stick with Beasley here.
                                Edge: Beasley






                                Memphis Grizzlies

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 13.7 percent This is one of the most clear-cut choices for Beasley. The Grizzlies have a hole at power forward since giving away Pau Gasol and they are currently stacked with three young point guards. Put Beasley on the floor with Rudy Gay and Mike Conley and the Grizzlies have a very formidable young core.
                                Edge: Beasley





                                New York Knicks

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 7.6 percent This is a very easy call. What the Knicks need more than anything else is chemistry and a floor leader who can bring all of the egos on the Knicks together. Now that we know Mike D'Antoni is running the show, getting a franchise-type point guard is even more important.
                                Rose is the right guy for the job. He's the type of player who can turn the culture around and orchestrate D'Antoni's high-octane offense. And unlike Steve Nash, he projects as a terrific defender, too.
                                Edge: Rose






                                Los Angeles Clippers

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 7.5 percent The Clippers are another team that really needs a point guard. Sam Cassell is gone and there is no telling whether Shaun Livingston will ever recover. However, the Clippers might need a power forward sooner than you think as well.
                                Elton Brand can terminate his contract this summer, and there are rumblings in L.A. that he might opt out for the chance at a title. If he does, Beasley could be the guy.
                                But right now, all signs are pointing to Rose as the Clippers' choice if they land the No. 1 pick.
                                Edge: Rose






                                Milwaukee Bucks

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 4.3 percent The Bucks spent last year's lottery pick on an athletic power forward with inside-outside skills -- Yi Jianlian. Would they pick another power forward in Beasley this year? Probably not.
                                Now that John Hammond has taken over as GM, he's looking for a tough leader. Mo Williams may be entrenched at the point in Milwaukee, but if Hammond gets a shot at a franchise point guard, I think he's taking it.
                                Edge: Rose






                                Charlotte Bobcats

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 2.8 percent A month ago, this looked like Beasley all the way. The Bobcats desperately need athleticism and rebounding in the frontcourt. And while Raymond Felton isn't as talented as Rose, he'll do.
                                However, with Larry Brown now coaching the team, he might push for a more dominant floor leader. This is a tough call. For now, we're sticking with Beasley, but this could change to Rose.
                                Edge: Beasley






                                Chicago Bulls

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 1.7 percent
                                Beasley would be a godsend to the Bulls. He's the perfect antidote for what they lack -- a confident, athletic low-post scorer who can draw double teams. Put him on the floor with Luol Deng, Ben Gordon, Joakim Noah and Kirk Hinrich and I think the Bulls' future suddenly gets much brighter. Then again, his character issues might scare GM John Paxson away, and Rose is an upgrade over Hinrich. Still, as of right now, I'm giving the edge to Beasley.
                                Edge: Beasley






                                New Jersey Nets

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 1.1 percent This one's a no-brainer. Beasley would be a monster in the Nets' system; he'd be an excellent replacement for Kenyon Martin. Put him on the floor with Vince Carter, Richard Jefferson and Devin Harris and you can start talking about the Nets' being playoff contenders again.
                                More important, it gives the Nets two talented young players -- Harris and Beasley -- to help lure LeBron in 2010.
                                Edge: Beasley






                                Indiana Pacers

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 0.8 percent Here's a team that appears to be 100 percent in the Rose camp. Given all of the off-court problems their players have faced, Larry Bird and company are looking for model citizens on and off the court. I doubt they take the risk on Beasley.
                                Besides, after years of watching Jamaal Tinsley's on-again, off-again performances, I think the idea of a young, talented point guard such as Rose would actually hold more appeal. This team needs leadership and Rose could provide it.
                                Edge: Rose






                                Sacramento Kings

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 0.7 percent This is a tough one. The Kings have needs at both the 4 and the 1, but it seems very likely that they'd lean toward Beasley. His talents on both ends of the floor would be great complements to Kevin Martin and Ron Artest.
                                Rose would be great running the point, and there's a need there, too. But right now we're opting for Beasley; this one is a wash.
                                Edge: Beasley






                                Portland Trail Blazers

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 0.6 percent The Blazers are another team that would likely opt for Rose immediately. GM Kevin Pritchard strongly believes in character, and I think Beasley would give him pause on such a young team.
                                The Blazers also have a bigger need at the point guard position. They have been searching for a franchise point guard to put on the floor with Oden, Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge. And Rose is it.
                                Edge: Rose






                                Golden State Warriors

                                Odds of winning the lottery: 0.5 percent The Warriors could go either way here. As far as needs go, a dominant, rebounding power forward like Beasley would be a great fit -- especially if Don Nelson is still the head coach.
                                However, with contract extension talks on shaky ground with Baron Davis, it could be time for the Warriors to look for a replacement at point guard. Right now, the edge still goes to Beasley.
                                Edge: Beasley

                                Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider.
                                Last edited by Will Galen; 05-12-2008, 08:35 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X