Tweet
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Looks like North Carolina will be ranked #1 in the country with it's players returning
Looks like North Carolina will be ranked #1 in the country with it's players returning
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
-
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Oh man, that's EXACTLY what I thought.Originally posted by Peskoe97 View PostThis space for rent.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
If the Wolves draft Mayo this year, I wonder what it takes to pry Foye away from them?
"I've got an idea--an idea so smart that my head would explode if I even began to know what I'm talking about." - Peter Griffin
Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Well, obviously not JO or Tins I wouldn't suspect. Without actually checking salaries, maybe some combo from this group?Originally posted by DanGrangerPwrRanger View Post
Shawne, Dun, Ike, Marquis, #11?
Real question surrounding Foye is how good can he be? Not to mention, is he a true point and how durable will he be?
I guess durability wise it's kind of a TJ Ford-like risk. Perhaps not quite as much, but Foye's had enough issues to make one hesitant.I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.
-Emiliano ZapataComment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Thought this was interesting....
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/column...ana&id=3437642
Jordan's game trying to catch up with his body
PHILADELPHIA -- The kids were merciless.
"C'mon," they'd scream. "You're the tallest guy out here. We keep throwing you the ball, and you don't do anything. You're awful."
And those were DeAndre Jordan's teammates.
That's the thing about being tall; people assume you are born with the tools of Wilt Chamberlain and the skills of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Forget that Jordan felt more like an awkward colt, all elbows and ankles as he tried to adjust to his chronically growth-spurting body.
He was the tallest kid in his class every year. He should be able to play.
"Oh my god, I heard so much trash talk," Jordan said and laughed.
The expectations didn't change much when he got to college, when that body had sprouted to 7 feet and the entire state of Super-Size-Me Texas expected Jordan to deliver great things to Texas A&M. He was OK but not a force, averaging 7.9 points, 6.0 rebounds and 1.3 blocks per game in his first and only season with the Aggies.
Now Jordan is about to pack his size 18 sneakers for the NBA. In a league that loves nothing more than potential and upside, the freakishly athletic Jordan induces salivating. He has hardly grown into his frame, his strength is all concentrated in his lower body with his upper body still like a piece of putty waiting for a weight-room sculptor to mold it.
He can handle the ball fairly well -- at a recent workout he did a series of 100 dribble drills, fumbling only twice -- and is a tremendous rebounder. His weakest link is his offense, but the NBA is littered with guys who couldn't/can't shoot.
On every draft board, he is a lottery pick lock. ESPN.com's Chad Ford rated him the 15th-best player in the draft, concluding that "on talent and physical ability, he's got the makings of a Top 5 pick."
But is the big, awkward kid ready to blossom?
"If someone is looking for instant gratification, he's not the right guy," said former NBA scout Steve Rosenberry, who's been working out Jordan for the past seven weeks in Philadelphia. "But three years from now, I mean who knows? Nobody has a crystal ball, but he could be the third-best player in this draft."
That's nothing shy of astounding to people who remember how Jordan played in the postseason.
And there probably aren't many who do remember him.
In two Big 12 tourney games and two NCAA tournament games, Jordan had seven points and five rebounds. Total.
"He'd make a play, we'd sit on the bench and think, 'There goes a first-rounder,'" Texas A&M coach Mark Turgeon said recently. "Five minutes later, he'd do something else and we'd think, 'He's coming back.'"
Far from home, far from anything he knows, the Houston native -- who has already signed with an agent, thus closing the book on a return to College Station -- has become a hoops rat. He spends upward of four hours a day in the gym at Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine (the same place the 76ers practice) before heading back to his hotel room.
Kansas State's Michael Beasley was here for a while but he left a few weeks ago, so Jordan's free time is pretty routine.
"What do I do when I'm done? Sleep," he said.
Most people would agree this change of scenery is exactly what Jordan needed. Blessed with ungodly physical talents -- he's a YouTube dunk favorite -- Jordan needed to reawaken his passion for the game.
College sort of sucked it out of him.
Like a lot of freshmen, Jordan struggled with the weight of expectations compared to the reality of results. In the hypercompetitive Big 12, he had great games (14 points and 9 rebounds versus lowly Colorado), average games (8 and 6 versus Iowa State) and awful games (2 and 3 versus Oklahoma State). And he rode the roller coaster of emotion with every one.
Before the season started, a frustrated Turgeon said "he's 18 going on 12" of Jordan's emotions. Jordan admits his tattered self-esteem would take a bath every time Turgeon yelled at him.
"I talked to him about getting too high and too low, but that's tough for me at my age and that young man had extraordinary pressure on him," Turgeon said. "Sometimes he'd get low, and it would carry over to practice. It was an ongoing thing. We talked all the time."
There's no room for mood swings in an 82-game NBA season. Coaches don't have the time or the interest in coddling players or offering buck-up speeches. Don't produce and want to pout? The guy one seat over will gladly take your job.
Consequently Rosenberry has spent as much time on Jordan's mental toughness as his physical skills. He admits he "loves the kid" and delighted at a recent prank Jordan pulled. But he hasn't been afraid to give him a good verbal lashing.
On Friday, Jordan had two awful practices, Rosenberry said. Jordan wasn't hitting his shots, so he decided everything he had done had been wasted.
Rosenberry not so gently explained to him that wasn't the case.
"When guys are young, everything is predicated on how many shots they make," Rosenberry said. "That's not who he is. His shot will get better with repetition and I told him, 'Everybody has days when you don't make shots.' I give him a lot of credit. He came back Saturday [in a private workout with 19 teams], and his workout was off the charts. He's come a long way."
If a sign of maturity is recognizing where you messed up and admitting it, Jordan is on his way. He knows now that his emotional and mental makeup interfered with his physical progress at A&M, knows he has no one to blame but himself.
"You have to keep a level head, stay on the path, and I didn't do that," Jordan said. "I was inconsistent because I'd get down on myself. I think if I went back to college, people would see a different player."
Maybe even a kid who plays as big as he stands.Last edited by Mr. Sobchak; 06-17-2008, 06:35 PM.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
The Suns are tyring to move up to draft Alexander, they are considering moving Barbosa or Diaw possibly to the Knicks for the 6th pick. Alexander is a lock at #6 either for the Knicks or someone else.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
This is very good news for the Pacers, means someone falls to them.Originally posted by eldubious View Post
Although I'm a hug Joe fan.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
more rumors from draftexpress
http://www.draftexpress.com/blog/Jonathan-Givony/
points of interest bolded.Trade Talk
Numerous teams we spoke with today discussed the rumors of a potential draft-night trade that is making the rounds in NBA circles. Presuming that Derrick Rose goes #1, Miami would select Michael Beasley at #2 regardless, and wait to see if O.J. Mayo were to fall to the 5th overall pick. If that indeed was the case, Memphis would select him, and then trade him to Miami along with Mike Miller in exchange for Mark Blount and Beasley.
Seattle is also reportedly trying hard to move up to #2, and is dangling Chris Wilcox as bait (in exchange for the cumbersome contract of Mark Blount). The Supersonics would also take Beasley there. This is all assuming that O.J. Mayo doesn’t go third to Minnesota, which is not something teams should take for granted just yet based off what we know so far.
Memphis’ additional first round selection, the #28 pick, acquired from the Lakers in the Pau Gasol trade, is also reportedly in play. Rumors have the Grizzlies potentially trading this pick to Denver along with Kyle Lowry in exchange for the #20 pick. It’s possible that they would try and leap-frog the Orlando Magic and select Courtney Lee, who reportedly had a terrific workout there last week.
Other picks that we’re hearing rumors about include #6 (New York, trying to move up, or back), #19 (Cleveland, possibly to move up and take Brandon Rush), and #29 (Detroit, who supposedly isn’t enamored by anyone in this area). Two teams that are reportedly looking to acquire an additional first round pick are the Spurs (who unfortunately have very little to offer) and the Suns. The Wizards wouldn’t mind moving out if someone would offer them a good deal involving a point guard, but at this point that doesn’t seem likely to happen. Cleveland is trying to buy their way into the mid-first round, but unlike in years past, it won’t be Phoenix that is selling.
Look for the Los Angeles Lakers to try and land an early second round pick (possibly from Seattle) in order to draft IUPUI’s George Hill. He worked out in Los Angeles and reportedly was very impressive. His college team actually ran the triangle offense, and that is always a big factor in the Lakers’ workouts.
Who’s Gonna Slip?
As we continue to work the phones to discuss with teams who they hear is going where, we first of all need to establish which prospects will be on the board. At this point it’s clear that there is a fairly significant drop-off in this year’s draft class right around the 12th (Sacramento) or 13th (Portland) pick, as all the prospects that are getting mentions have some serious “warts” in the words of one NBA executive, which make teams hesitant about drafting them. The question is which will be overlooked, and which will cause players to slip.
Players that might find themselves being drafted a bit lower than they hoped include DeAndre Jordan, JaVale McGee, and possibly even Anthony Randolph. If Sacramento selects Darrell Arthur at #12 like many NBA sources we spoke with anticipate (this was his last workout stop before cancelling numerous workouts), then Randolph could be in for quite a tumble, as he would likely continue to slip past Portland at #13, Golden State at #14, Phoenix at #15, until reaching Philadelphia at #16. That’s about 10 spots lower than some mocks have him projected right now, but isn’t out of the question depending on how things play out next week. Randolph is not helping himself reportedly with the way he’s working out, being very average so far according to numerous people who’ve watched him, looking “laid back” or even “out of shape.” Compounding the problem is that he may have recently hurt his shoulder.
Another player who could crash the lottery unexpectedly and even shockingly go just one spot below his twin brother is Stanford center Robin Lopez. Lopez reportedly canceled all his remaining workouts (with the Pacers, Kings, Sixers, and more) with a supposed “sprained ankle” after working out for the New Jersey Nets this past week. Although the tenth pick is widely believed to be Danilo Gallinari’s, no one would know better about where the Italian small forward will get drafted than his agent Arn Tellem, who also happens to represent the Lopez twins. Robin being promised to go tenth (a speculatory rumor that is definitely making the rounds) almost surely means that Gallinari is going sixth to the Knicks. The Nets can’t expect to wait and pick Lopez at #21, as there is very little chance he gets past Phoenix at 15, or at the very worst (if Donte Greene slips past Golden State), Toronto at 17, where he is extremely coveted.
While DeAndre Jordan and JaVale McGee are refusing to conduct workouts with certain teams drafting outside of the lottery (McGee’s mother foolishly won’t let him visit anyone past 12 from what one frustrated team told us), there is no shortage of workout warriors on the prowl looking to take their spot in the teens portion of the draft. One of those is Alexis Ajinca, who may be working himself into that 12-14 range, based off the workouts he’s having.
One executive who recently watched him expressed shock at his combination of physical tools (7-1 in shoes, 240 pounds, with a near 7-7 wingspan), coordination and agility. “If he were in college, let’s say at Nevada instead of JaVale McGee, he would be a sure-fire top 10 pick,” the executive noted. “He’s bigger than McGee, and he’s also more skilled…with that length, he is going to be able to bother some people for sure” Ajinca is answering question marks about his toughness by not backing down from anyone he’s faced so far, particularly in an outstanding workout in Charlotte where he matched up with Jordan, McGee and Roy Hibbert. His experience playing against grown men all season long in the French league is certainly showing in workouts so far it seems.
The safest pick amongst players being projected to go from 13-19 is likely Brandon Rush. He could seemingly be picked by any of those teams, and be able to find a way to be productive thanks to his size, shooting ability and defensive skills. He’s probably not going to be a star, but as you’ll be able to read in the research conducted by Heather N. Allen and Paul Gearan tomorrow, that’s not such a bad thing in this range.
Feedback for this article may be sent to jonathan@draftexpress.com
it's not surprising that raw guys like randolph, jordan, and mcgee are falling. though a bit surprising that robin lopez is climbing so high. same with ajinca. both of them will be near our range, if dx is correct.
i like george hill for our 2nd round pick, if he's still around.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Saw this in the local paper about Augustin and his workout with Portland. Thought I'd pass it along since many of the mocks have us picking him...
http://www.oregonlive.com/blazers/or...530.xml&coll=7
Augustin gives Blazers another talking point
Texas' point guard has an impressive workout, but Portland might need to trade up if it hopes to draft him
Thursday, June 19, 2008
JOE FREEMAN
The Oregonian Staff
TUALATIN -- As the Trail Blazers continued to ponder their offseason options, field calls regarding potential trades and debate whether to unload the No. 13 pick in the NBA draft, they were presented with another enticing possibility Wednesday morning.
And it came in the form of a smooth, playmaking 6-foot point guard from Texas.
In a performance that wowed coach Nate McMillan and further enhanced his draft stock, sophomore D.J. Augustin delivered perhaps the most impressive showing during more than two weeks of predraft workouts at the Blazers' practice facility.
McMillan and general manager Kevin Pritchard have been guarded in their public critiques of predraft visitors, and they remained so Wednesday. But it was clear the player who won the Bob Cousy Award, given to college basketball's best point guard, made a favorable impression -- even though the Blazers might have to trade up to draft him.
"I think this kid is born to be a point guard," Pritchard said.
The Blazers were impressed by the leaping ability and potential of West Virginia forward Joe Alexander on Tuesday and the playmaking ability and athleticism of UCLA guard Russell Westbrook last week. But Augustin was equally, if not more, impressive than each of the high-level prospects.
Toward the end of the workout, when reporters were allowed to watch, Augustin displayed a polished, NBA-ready game that included accurate shooting, smart play and the ability to navigate through defenses -- particularly on pick-and-roll plays. He faced little resistance in penetrating toward the basket and always seemed to find the open man, which often resulted in easy jump shots or layups.
During a three-on-three half-court drill, Augustin once knifed between two perimeter defenders and dished a pretty no-look pass to a teammate for an open layup. Moments later, during an almost identical situation, he sliced between two defenders, darted right, stepped back and hit a midrange jumper.
Augustin competed against five other prospects, including Oregon's Malik Hairston; Xavier's Stanley Burrell, the Atlantic 10 Conference defensive player of the year; and guard Jason Rich, a four-year starter from Florida State. And even though McMillan values taller, more physical point guards, he discovered that Augustin could "hold his own" against bigger NBA guards.
"I tried to put a physical guard, a quick guard and a big guard on him just to take a look at all that . . . and he did a nice job of getting where he needed to be," McMillan said. "The one thing he has is the ability to handle the ball very well. Even though some of the guards were trying to pressure him and get to the ball, his ability to handle the ball forced them to have to back off. But also his ability to shoot the ball forced them to stay pretty close. He's a guy who can get where he needs to go on the basketball floor."
Augustin made 37 of 50 shots (74 percent), including 26 of his first 30 attempts, during a three-point shooting drill at the end of the workout. The consensus first-team All-American averaged 16.9 points and 6.2 assists and shot 40.2 percent from three-point range during his two-year college career.
In an effort to enhance his draft stock, Augustin has been working out in Houston under the guidance of former NBA player and coach John Lucas. For much of the last two months, Augustin regularly has competed against Denver guard J.R. Smith and Toronto point guard T.J. Ford, who has become a mentor.
"I've been doing this all my life," Augustin said. "I know how to lead a team and hopefully I can come in and do that for any team (in the NBA). I'd love to play with the players (Portland has). It's a great organization. I'm friends with LaMarcus Aldridge. It's a great team and . . . it would be great to play here."
But will he be available for the Blazers? Wednesday marked Augustin's final predraft workout after auditions with Indiana (which has the No. 11 pick in the draft), Phoenix (No. 15), Sacramento (No. 12), the Los Angeles Clippers (No. 7) and the New York Knicks (No. 6). Most mock drafts have him landing with teams picking ahead of the Blazers.
One prevailing thought is that the Blazers intend to trade No. 13 in an effort to acquire a veteran. But Pritchard has made it clear that should the right player come along, he wouldn't hesitate to trade up and acquire him. If nothing else, Augustin on Wednesday offered Pritchard and the Blazers another appealing possibility, showing that he might be the best natural point guard in the draft outside of likely No. 1 pick Derrick Rose.
"You know what he is, he's a pure point guard," Pritchard said. "He's crafty, he knows how to get in the paint and make the right decisions. And we were talking about it a little bit: The thing about D.J. is he thinks the game very fast. His ability to see the floor and react to the situation -- which is what the great point guards do -- he does that well. You can tell he's been a point guard his whole life."
Joe Freeman: 503-294-5183; joefreeman@news.oregonian.com To read his Behind the Beat blog, go to http://blog.oregonlive.com/ behindblazersbeat/
I was on the fence about this guy so this makes me feel better about him. Doesn't mention his defense though.
vlComment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
I know this won't be a popular sentiment here, but I think Augustin will be a better pro than Conley Jr.
I think if Conley were in this draft, he would go in the 8 to 16 range.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
He was in a better draft last year and went at number 4.Originally posted by Wage View Post
Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
Ehhh... no, I think last years draft was way better in the first 8 picks then this years draft. This years draft though a little less on quality is much deeper IMO.Originally posted by Wage View Post
OTOH this draft class also seems much younger, but I could be wrong there, so maybe there's more growth, but I don't recall many commentarors telling that.
I think Conley would prob. go at 4-6, pick #4 depending on what the Sonics would prefer (Bayless or Conley Jr. I would say Conley probably btw).
Regards,
Mourning
Last edited by Mourning; 06-20-2008, 04:45 PM.2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws
2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws
2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws
Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
In my opinion, this year's draft is far superior in terms of guards.Originally posted by Indy View Post
I think Bayless, Mayo, and Gordon are clearly superior to Conley, and Westbrook and Augustin are close, but I give the edge to both Westbrook and Augustin. I also do not think Law would crack the top 20 in this draft.Comment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
I agree, I don't remember a draft that all of the highest picks are 1st year players or seem to be.Originally posted by Mourning View PostEhhh... no, I think last years draft was way better in the first 8 picks then this years draft. This years draft though a little less on quality is much deeper IMO.
OTOH this draft class also seems much younger, but I could be wrong there, so maybe there's more growth, but I don't recall many commentarors telling that.
I think Conley would prob. go at 4-6, pick #4 depending on what the Sonics would prefer (Bayless or Conley Jr. I would say Conley probably btw).
Regards,
MourningComment
-
Re: Official 2008 NBA Draft recruiting center...
The recent Chad Ford Podcast has Jason Thompson of Rider moving up to 13-15 area maybe.
Also Leandro Barbosa and Boris Diaw are available. Barbosa is a better point guard than the Pacers currently have, so it would interesting if they could drop down to 15 and get the guy they want AND get Barbosa.
Also, the Richard Jefferson rumors are flying again because the Nets want to get under the cap in 2010. Hmmmmm who do we know that expires that year?????
Anyway, if you could move JO to the Nets for Jefferson and the 21 pick, would you do it.
I know Jefferson is another small forward, but I think he could play the 2 better than Dunleavy and thats an AWESOME wing rotation. I've always though Dun should come off the bench anyway and be 6th man of the year.
JO and Richard Jefferson were not the rumor stated, but JO would completely satisfy what WAS stated that they were trying to do.
How about JO for Richard Jefferson and the #21 pick and the right to swap the 10th for 11th. It works for both teams in a BIG way I think.
In this scenario, you can get Augustine and a maybe a Speight, Hibbert, or CDR or Flip it and get a Big first and pick up a Chalmers on the back end, it opens up a WHOLE lot of things. And that is not even counting the 41 pick.
It works for the Nets cuz they get JO which is 100% what they lack right now. He drops off in 2010 so Jay Z and Brooklyn can go after Lebron. It works for the Pacers cuz you pick up the extra draft pick and get rid of JO who is leaving anyway in two years. You pick Richard Jefferson who averaged over 20 a game last year and is in his prime and CAN penetrate, plus he played 82 games at 39 mins a night. I think Jefferson is a great lockeroom guy never had problems that I am aware of and I think he is tailor made for Obie's system. I also think he would compliment both Granger and Dunleavy.
This makes too much sense to happen. Oh ya and for those of you concerned about Jefferson, he's still young enough (turns 28 tomorrow) and as far as the length of contract, you would be hard pressed to spend your money better, imho.
Jefferson makes 13.2, 14.2, 15 = 42.4
JO makes 21.3, 23 = 44.3Last edited by Speed; 06-20-2008, 09:44 PM.Comment
Comment