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 Speed View Post
    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 = 44.3
    Salaries don't match. There is a difference of 8 mil in their 08-09 salaries. There has to be another filler from NJ to make it work.

    Comment


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

      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
      Salaries don't match. There is a difference of 8 mil in their 08-09 salaries. There has to be another filler from NJ to make it work.
      How much does the draft pick count?

      Comment


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

        Originally posted by Speed View Post
        How much does the draft pick count?
        Nothing before the draft.

        Comment


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

          Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
          Nothing before the draft.
          Then how do you ever trade a player for a pick? Anyway I think they have Keith Van Horns dead contract too, I'm not sure what it is, but you could make it work, I think.

          Comment


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

            Originally posted by Speed View Post
            Then how do you ever trade a player for a pick? Anyway I think they have Keith Van Horns dead contract too, I'm not sure what it is, but you could make it work, I think.
            KVH contract, when I looked it up last night on Shamsports, is non-guaranteed for 2 years. I'm not sure it can be used, but if it can it costs the Nets nothing to use. The other player that has a contract with enough money to make it work, that I felt the Nets would trade, is Stromile Swift with an expiring 6.2 mil salary. I can't imagine the Nets would not include him in the trade. They were willing to put Collins in the trade last season who they traded to get Swift.

            I have a little different slant on trading for Jefferson, it is the samething I wanted to do last year, and that is to trade Jefferson for better pieces to the puzzle. By keeping Jefferson, it creates an evermore glut at SF, and you are taking minutes away from Shawne and Graham.

            Comment


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

              Originally posted by Speed View Post
              Then how do you ever trade a player for a pick? Anyway I think they have Keith Van Horns dead contract too, I'm not sure what it is, but you could make it work, I think.
              Several points.

              I know JO's agent has said he isn't going to opt out, but I haven't read anything that says we can now trade JO before or during the draft. It would have to be a deal that takes place after July 1st.

              Two, there have been a lot of JO trades to NJ on here that will work, so it could be done.

              Three, regarding KVH; NJ has no doubt already opted out of his contract. If not, and we traded for him we would have to pay him for two years, since the rest of his contract would have kicked in. That won't happen.

              Four, 71. How are draft picks handled in trades?

              Draft picks (both first and second round) count $0 for salary matching purposes. This is true both before and after the draft, until the player signs a contract. This can make it very difficult to construct a trade that is equitable in both trade value and basketball talent. For example, Vancouver selected Steve Francis with the #2 pick in the 1999 draft, and traded his draft rights to Houston. When the trade was finally engineered, it included three teams (Orlando was also involved), 11 players (including Francis) and two future draft picks.

              Once the draft pick signs a contract, his actual salary becomes his trade value.

              Note that even though a draft pick's trade value (for salary matching purposes) is $0, a first round pick is included in the team's team salary at 100% of his scale amount once he is selected in the draft, unless he signs with a non-NBA team (see question number 41). If an unsigned first round draft pick is traded, then 100% of his scale amount is included in the acquiring team's team salary as soon as the trade is completed. An unsigned second round pick does not count toward team salary.

              Teams can only trade draft picks five years into the future (for example, if this is the 2005-06 season, then the 2010 pick can be traded, but the 2011 pick can't). It is common to "protect" picks depending on their position (e.g. "we keep it if it's in the lottery, otherwise you get it"), to avoid a repeat of some unfortunate past trades, such as the 1982 trade between the Cavs and Lakers, where the pick LA received turned out to be the first overall pick and was used to draft James Worthy. Now, it is common to see picks traded with protection that relaxes over several years -- for example, a first-round pick in 2005, unless it is in the lottery, in which case a first-round pick in 2006, unless it is one of the top three, in which case an unconditional pick in 2007.
              In addition, teams are restricted from trading away future first round draft picks in consecutive years. This is called the "Ted Stepien Rule." Stepien owned the Cavs from 1980-83, and made a series of bad trades that cost the Cavs several years' first round picks. As a result of Stepien's ineptitude, teams are now prevented from making trades which might leave them without a future first-round draft pick in consecutive years.
              This rule applies only to future first round picks. For example, if this is the 2005-06 season, then teams can trade their 2006 first round pick without regard to whether they had a 2005 pick, since their 2005 pick is no longer a future pick. But they can't trade away both their 2006 and 2007 picks, since both are future picks. Teams sometimes work around this rule by trading first round picks in alternate years.
              In addition, teams are required to have only a first round pick, and not necessarily their first round pick. So teams may trade away their own future picks in consecutive years if they have another team's first round pick in one of those years.
              A team cannot sign and immediately trade a draft pick in a sign-and-trade arrangement (see question number 76).

              http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#76
              Last edited by Will Galen; 06-21-2008, 07:53 AM.

              Comment


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

                Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                Several points.

                I know JO's agent has said he isn't going to opt out, but I haven't read anything that says we can now trade JO before or during the draft. It would have to be a deal that takes place after July 1st.

                Two, there have been a lot of JO trades to NJ on here that will work, so it could be done.

                Three, regarding KVH; NJ has no doubt already opted out of his contract. If not, and we traded for him we would have to pay him for two years, since the rest of his contract would have kicked in. That won't happen.

                Four, 71. How are draft picks handled in trades?

                Draft picks (both first and second round) count $0 for salary matching purposes. This is true both before and after the draft, until the player signs a contract. This can make it very difficult to construct a trade that is equitable in both trade value and basketball talent. For example, Vancouver selected Steve Francis with the #2 pick in the 1999 draft, and traded his draft rights to Houston. When the trade was finally engineered, it included three teams (Orlando was also involved), 11 players (including Francis) and two future draft picks.

                Once the draft pick signs a contract, his actual salary becomes his trade value.

                Note that even though a draft pick's trade value (for salary matching purposes) is $0, a first round pick is included in the team's team salary at 100% of his scale amount once he is selected in the draft, unless he signs with a non-NBA team (see question number 41). If an unsigned first round draft pick is traded, then 100% of his scale amount is included in the acquiring team's team salary as soon as the trade is completed. An unsigned second round pick does not count toward team salary.

                Teams can only trade draft picks five years into the future (for example, if this is the 2005-06 season, then the 2010 pick can be traded, but the 2011 pick can't). It is common to "protect" picks depending on their position (e.g. "we keep it if it's in the lottery, otherwise you get it"), to avoid a repeat of some unfortunate past trades, such as the 1982 trade between the Cavs and Lakers, where the pick LA received turned out to be the first overall pick and was used to draft James Worthy. Now, it is common to see picks traded with protection that relaxes over several years -- for example, a first-round pick in 2005, unless it is in the lottery, in which case a first-round pick in 2006, unless it is one of the top three, in which case an unconditional pick in 2007.
                In addition, teams are restricted from trading away future first round draft picks in consecutive years. This is called the "Ted Stepien Rule." Stepien owned the Cavs from 1980-83, and made a series of bad trades that cost the Cavs several years' first round picks. As a result of Stepien's ineptitude, teams are now prevented from making trades which might leave them without a future first-round draft pick in consecutive years.
                This rule applies only to future first round picks. For example, if this is the 2005-06 season, then teams can trade their 2006 first round pick without regard to whether they had a 2005 pick, since their 2005 pick is no longer a future pick. But they can't trade away both their 2006 and 2007 picks, since both are future picks. Teams sometimes work around this rule by trading first round picks in alternate years.
                In addition, teams are required to have only a first round pick, and not necessarily their first round pick. So teams may trade away their own future picks in consecutive years if they have another team's first round pick in one of those years.
                A team cannot sign and immediately trade a draft pick in a sign-and-trade arrangement (see question number 76).

                http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#76

                Thanks for the info, very interesting.

                Here's the Keith Van Horn thing. I knew I had seen something a couple of months back, for some reason, I think it is around 8 million that expires this year, but the money part I'm not sure about. Well I found one thing that said his 2007 salary was 4.3, so I'm still not sure what the 2008 salary is, but it still might not quite be enough to match. His contract is a pretty valuable thing for them.

                http://www.northjersey.com/sports/ne...als_right.html

                They want more proven players and hope their assets, which also include Dallas' No. 1 pick in 2010 acquired in the Jason Kidd trade and the expiring contracts of Ager, Stromile Swift and Keith Van Horn, could help them acquire veterans.
                Last edited by Speed; 06-21-2008, 08:16 AM.

                Comment


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

                  Originally posted by Will Galen View Post
                  Several points.

                  I know JO's agent has said he isn't going to opt out, but I haven't read anything that says we can now trade JO before or during the draft. It would have to be a deal that takes place after July 1st.
                  If JO officially notified the Pacers in writing of his intent to waive the ETO, which is implied in this Mike Wells article, then the Pacers are free to trade him prior to July 1. It is not clear that the notification was in writing, but I inferred it from this:

                  O’Neal’s representatives recently informed the Pacers he will not opt out of the final two years of his contract. O’Neal had until June 30 to decide whether to become an unrestricted free agent.
                  So, I believe JO is in play for Draft Day trades.

                  Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
                  KVH contract, when I looked it up last night on Shamsports, is non-guaranteed for 2 years. I'm not sure it can be used, but if it can it costs the Nets nothing to use.
                  A non-guaranteed contract is still a tradeable asset of the team since it is the team's option, not the players. If you'll recall, both Rawle Marshall and Josh Powell had non-guaranteed contracts when we acquired them as part of the AJ-Army deal. There were certain dates we had to release them by in order to avoid paying them their contracts, but we kept them and the year became guaranteed. KVH's contract could be used, and I think we could release him in relatively short order.

                  Originally posted by Speed View Post
                  Then how do you ever trade a player for a pick? Anyway I think they have Keith Van Horns dead contract too, I'm not sure what it is, but you could make it work, I think.
                  There are only two times you can trade a player for a pick.

                  --If the team receiving the player is far enough under the cap to absorb the player's salary, then there is no issue

                  --If both teams are over the cap, a deal could still be made if the player is making the league minimum. Teams are allowed to take players at league minimum without penalty to the cap (though it does affect luxury tax), so, theoretically, the Pacers could trade, say the #41 pick to Atlanta for Solomon Jones. (Not that I'm proposing that in the least...that was just the first player I found with a minimum salary contract for next year.)

                  There may be a third time, but I'm a little fuzzy on the exact rule. This is the famed Trade Exception. It's possible for a team to trade a TE for a player, but I struggle as to what can be combined with the TE. I know you can't combine TE's or combine a TE with a player, but I'm not sure if a pick would be a problem. The Harrington deal is a problematic example because of the inclusion of John Edwards. (Was it one deal? Was it two deals?)

                  Comment


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

                    Originally posted by Speed View Post
                    Thanks for the info, very interesting.

                    Here's the Keith Van Horn thing. I knew I had seen something a couple of months back, for some reason, I think it is around 8 million that expires this year, but the money part I'm not sure about. Well I found one thing that said his 2007 salary was 4.3, so I'm still not sure what the 2008 salary is, but it still might not quite be enough to match. His contract is a pretty valuable thing for them.

                    .
                    KVH's 2008-2009 salary is about $3.8mm.

                    Comment


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

                      Originally posted by Speed View Post

                      said his 2007 salary was 4.3, so I'm still not sure what the 2008 salary is, but it still might not quite be enough to match. His contract is a pretty valuable thing for them.
                      Shamsports shows KVH's 07-08 salary at 4.2 mil with non-guaranteed years in 08-09 at 3.8 mil and 09-10 at 3.3 mil. I'm guessing the contract was front loaded and the last 2 years non-guaranteed to make the Kidd deal work.

                      I'm not sure how trading non-guaranteed contracts work, if traded they stay non-guaranteed or they become guaranteed. If they stay non-guaranteed, the Pacers could cut him or just use him later in another trade as filler.

                      Comment


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

                        I never go to Rats, well, I hadn't been there in months, but draft time is one of my favorite times, so I decided to take a look. I always think its funny/interesting to see the "insider" info. I don't believe it at all, he calls Harrison plodding, which I would say he's poor Bball IQ, but never slow for a big guy. And he talks about how the Tinsley and I think that is completely not true or even close. Otherwise its pretty well thought out, I think. I guess if the draft the Frenchman I'll eat every word. Anyway here's the post.

                        http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...yCurrentPage=0

                        Parlez Vous Francais.....

                        "You better, Pacers will take Alexis Ajinca. Ideally, they're looking to move the 11th pick and draft him a little lower OR trade for a second 1st round pick under 20. But, if they can't swing either of the deals, he's still there man at 11.

                        Larry wants a big who can play and contribute this year. Ajinca has the best footwork of any 7'r, great length and athleticism, and can step back and nail the mid-range jumper, forcing defenders to take him seriously away from the post. The team believes he will be NBA ready by midseason."

                        -------
                        AND in a later post in that same thread.

                        "Inside information on the player highest on the Pacer's list for an immediate contributor, which apparantly is a big Bird priority. Ajinca also brings two important things to the table. One, is footwork - the team knows what plodding feet result in, as it's been core issue with Harrison's ability to avoid fouls in the NBA. Second, he adds a center presence that can run in O'Brien's system and hopefully allow O'Neal to finally play the 4-spot. Presence alone on the court, without improving the defense at all from last year, could lower points-against by about 4per game via blocks and changing shots. Combine that with whatever he can contribute offensively from the 5-spot (a position completely void of production last year), and the team goes from outside to inside the playoffs. Seems the team never will go the Boston route and tank a season to win 1-2 years out. The only issue is draft position, as 'bigs' are being valued relatively low this year, they feel they can get him later in the round. However, he is who they want.

                        That said, the draft board has Westbrook gone by the 11th. I think if he falls, the team will have to take him as they're in love with his overall size/stature and potential to contribute perimiter defense off the bench season 1. Should he fall, look for the Pacers to aggressively look to trade back into the 1st round to grab Ajinca.

                        Biggest "oh no - don't do that on the board"....Anthony Randolph. Don't let O'Brien draft, that's all I'm going to say.

                        Player on the trading block, Foster + name your favorite semi-valuable player you'd like to see gone.

                        Player not in as bad of a doghouse as you'd think - Tinsley. Verbal punishment in the press has been to motivate him, the team desperately wants/needs him to contribute. That said, he could just as easily be carrying Foster's bags to some other city if a deal for a veteran point guard emerges.

                        Player more in the doghouse than you'd expect - Granger. Team is laying hard on his faults, partially to light a fire under him to play defense and work within O'Brien's system to get other players involved, and partially to cut down his perceived value as ultimately they have to sign him long term at the end of the season. His agent is dressing up his public image because they sense it's a franchise weakness and thus makes for a stronger negotiating position with team. Trust me, there is a brewing confrontation on this front. Expect to here a lot of "I'd love to stay with this theam BUT...basketball is a business....type comments"."
                        Last edited by Speed; 06-21-2008, 11:38 PM.

                        Comment


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

                          I'm not sure if this was posted....but Wells posted this in his Blog today.

                          http://blogs.indystar.com/pacersinsi...rook_wont.html

                          June 21, 2008
                          Westbrook won't be a Pacer

                          From IndyStar.com
                          Posted by Mike Wells


                          You can stop wondering if Russell Westbrook will be there when the Pacers pick at No. 11 on Thursday.

                          Pacers president Larry Bird had hoped Westbrook would visit Tuesday after not working out for them because of an injury last week.

                          That plan got scrapped because I've been told Westbrook has been given a "promise" by a team picking higher than the Pacers. I'm not sure which team has given Westbrook the "promise."

                          Wouldn't it be something if Donnie Walsh took the player his former team has had its eye on for some time?

                          That leaves D.J. Augustin at No. 11 for the Pacers if he's there, right?

                          You would think that, but I was talking to somebody in the organization last week about the whole point guard-best player available scenario. That person brought up a good point: Would you rather draft a point guard that's going to be just an average player in the NBA or take the best player available?

                          What if a player falls in their lap (think back to Danny Granger in 2005) at No. 11? You've got to pass on Augustin (if he's still there) and take the better overall player.

                          My man Steve from Area 51,52,53,55,58, draft picks have no financial value when it comes to trades.
                          Not in any particular order, I'm guessing the following are shoe-ins for the draft...assuming that Westbrook indeed has a promise:

                          1 ) Rose
                          2 ) Beasley
                          3 ) Love
                          4 ) Bayless
                          5 ) Mayo
                          6 ) Westbrook
                          7 ) Lopez
                          8 ) Gordon

                          With decent workouts and other solid prospects like Joe Alexander, Danilo Gallnari, Darrell Arthur and players with potential that may go higher like Jordan....I can see any of them going higher ( probably Alexander or Gallinari to the Bucks ) and therefore pushing someone decent to us.

                          I'm guessing that the Nets will pick anything other then a Guard since they already have Harris, Williams and VC....but taking into consideration what Wells pointed out about Augustin....Who will likely be available when we pick?

                          or worse....we are ( again ) stuck in No-Man's land when it comes to drafting.....we are the 1st team to draft a player that may or may not pan out....
                          Last edited by CableKC; 06-21-2008, 11:57 PM.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


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

                            Originally posted by Speed View Post
                            I never go to Rats, well, I hadn't been there in months, but draft time is one of my favorite times, so I decided to take a look. I always think its funny/interesting to see the "insider" info. I don't believe it at all, he calls Harrison plodding, which I would say he's poor Bball IQ, but never slow for a big guy. And he talks about how the Tinsley and I think that is completely not true or even close. Otherwise its pretty well thought out, I think. I guess if the draft the Frenchman I'll eat every word. Anyway here's the post.

                            http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...yCurrentPage=0

                            Parlez Vous Francais.....

                            "You better, Pacers will take Alexis Ajinca. Ideally, they're looking to move the 11th pick and draft him a little lower OR trade for a second 1st round pick under 20. But, if they can't swing either of the deals, he's still there man at 11.

                            Larry wants a big who can play and contribute this year. Ajinca has the best footwork of any 7'r, great length and athleticism, and can step back and nail the mid-range jumper, forcing defenders to take him seriously away from the post. The team believes he will be NBA ready by midseason."

                            -------
                            AND in a later post in that same thread.

                            "Inside information on the player highest on the Pacer's list for an immediate contributor, which apparantly is a big Bird priority. Ajinca also brings two important things to the table. One, is footwork - the team knows what plodding feet result in, as it's been core issue with Harrison's ability to avoid fouls in the NBA. Second, he adds a center presence that can run in O'Brien's system and hopefully allow O'Neal to finally play the 4-spot. Presence alone on the court, without improving the defense at all from last year, could lower points-against by about 4per game via blocks and changing shots. Combine that with whatever he can contribute offensively from the 5-spot (a position completely void of production last year), and the team goes from outside to inside the playoffs. Seems the team never will go the Boston route and tank a season to win 1-2 years out. The only issue is draft position, as 'bigs' are being valued relatively low this year, they feel they can get him later in the round. However, he is who they want.
                            Is there an official Workout list from the Pacers somewhere?

                            I could be wrong....but checking the Workout list from RealGM at http://www.realgm.com/src_feature_ar..._workout_list/, but I don't even think that Ajinca has worked out for the Pacers.
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


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

                              Originally posted by CableKC View Post

                              8 ) Lopez
                              9 ) Gordon

                              Who will likely be available when we pick?
                              I think there is a very good chance one these two will be available at #11. Odds are there will be at least one or two surprise picks in the top 10. I wouldn't mind either of these players and would take either over Augustin or Speights.

                              Edit: Ok, I see your correction....but there's still a great chance one of these guys slips.
                              Last edited by BlueNGold; 06-22-2008, 12:00 AM.

                              Comment


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

                                Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                                Is there an official Workout list from the Pacers somewhere?

                                I could be wrong....but checking the Workout list from RealGM at http://www.realgm.com/src_feature_ar..._workout_list/, but I don't even think that Ajinca has worked out for the Pacers.

                                Nope, or at least he's not listed as an interview on the Pacers.com site.

                                http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/draft_central_2008.html

                                I guess he had a really good Nike Hoop Summit this year, put on some muscle, he was early Bender thin before and he's still too thin at this moment. I've read he has really outplayed guys in workouts because he's used to playing against grown men for that last year in the French league and has been more physical than some of the 19 year old bigs out there. Ford I think has him at 20 now and said that may not be high enough. The dude looks like he is crazy long, so who knows.
                                Last edited by Speed; 06-22-2008, 12:15 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X