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 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
    Do you think T-Will is a better ball player than Chris Douglas Roberts? I see T-Will going closer to pick number 25 than 15 this year is all. The only way the Pacers draft him is in the second round. Larry Bird has a plan for this team.
    T-Will and CDR are very different players. CDR is definitely a more versatile scorer than T-Will. No one will deny that. But T-Will is the more complete player and is superior in passing, rebounding, and defending. CDR is the better scorer, but T-Will played in a system where he wasn't asked to go out and score 18 a night.

    Not that stats are ever the be-all, end-all... but let's just look at their numbers in their final year in college:

    Pace-adjusted per 40

    REB/AST/STL/EFF

    CDR - 5.5, 2.4, 1.6, 16.5
    T-Will - 9.7, 5.7, 2.6, 19.5

    Those are some pretty big discrepancies. The only question mark in T-Will's game is his jump shooting. But this is something he can develop. Like Pitino said, he sees T-Will as having a Ron Artest type development (a streaky, mediocre shooter in college to a solid to above-average shooter all the way to 3-point range).

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by Since86 View Post
      Yes.

      I would question why you would even make that comparison, because they are totally different players. CDR can score, but a lot of players can score.

      There is a very select few players that have Williams' skill set.
      CDR & TWILL are similar b/c

      CDR was getting a lot of hype @ this time last year.

      Both are not "combine/drill" players

      CDR fell, T-Will might fall.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        I do not think the Pacers will be drafting @ #9 this year. I really think if not top three. I see them drafting #12/13 is all. I just believe Eric Maynor or Ty Lawson are a better fit for the future.

        C- Hibbert

        F- Granger

        W- Rush

        PG is next.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
          I'm curious as to what you mean by "close to."

          Only player in the league who shoots that many a night is Dwight. Closest SG is Kevin Martin at 10.3, then Wade at 9.6. Kobe is next with 6.9, then Brandon Roy (6.5), Iverson (6.1), and Iguodala (6.1). That's only six, not a dozen. I'll let you count the rest if you like, but by the time you get to the bottom of the dozen in FTAs you're nowhere near 11 per game.

          It doesn't change your statement that Rush could be getting more FTAs, and I think that's a valid place for him to work on improving (just like Danny did last year). But if that's your primary criterion as to why he's a bust, then there's something wrong with your standards.
          I don't think he's a bust. I just think hes the 8th player in an 8 man rotaion on a good team............and I'm not talking baout now.........I think that is his ceiling based on his ability and talent not on his current production.

          He didn't shoot FTs at kansas, either...........His game is that of a standstill jumpshooter...........and he has a good stroke. Morris petersen has a good stroke too.

          He is what he is and the only argument I have is with people who evaluate him as something more than that.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by Plax80 View Post
            I don't think he's a bust. I just think hes the 8th player in an 8 man rotaion on a good team............and I'm not talking baout now.........I think that is his ceiling based on his ability and talent not on his current production.

            He didn't shoot FTs at kansas, either...........His game is that of a standstill jumpshooter...........and he has a good stroke. Morris petersen has a good stroke too.

            He is what he is and the only argument I have is with people who evaluate him as something more than that.
            You are worse than Croz when it comes to Danny, and that is saying a lot. Im sorry but what you are saying just doesn't jive with what I see on a regular basis watching pacers games. Its like some time last year you decided Brandon would never be anything more than a copy of Kareem. In fact every time you try to describe Brandon's game you describe Kareem. Stand still jumpers? Do you even watch the pacers?

            For one thing you grossly underrate Brandons athleticism, and apparently his lock down defense doesn't really mean a whole lot to you. Hell you just harp on free throws all day like its the end of the world if a rookie SG doesn't get to line 6 or 7 times a game. It amazes me.
            "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

            - ilive4sports

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              He's bordering on troll status IMO.....

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                i think that line has been crossed
                "Sometimes, when you look Andy in the eyes, you get a feeling somebody else is driving." -- David Letterman

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  naw i just think he doesnt watch the pacers play or basketball for that matter.
                  Last edited by ReginaldWayne; 04-02-2009, 09:26 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Moving on and not fueling this flame.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by UncleReg View Post
                      I havent seen much of Jrue, but I think Tyreke has the potential to be a terrific dribble-drive, kick-out point guard, which is exactly what we need with our great wing shooters (Granger, Rush, Dun). He gets into the lane so easily and is a deadly finisher, forcing defenses to collapse on him. He probably has the most fluid ball handling of any prospect. He's definitely a score-first point guard, but showed that he can run an offense after being put at the point halfway through the season. He is a mismatch nightmare at 6-6 and almost 7-foot wingspan. He just needs to work on his decision making...
                      I remember reading that he was very ball dominant which scared me off after watching TJ this year. Of course with the better size and finishing ability of Evans this sort of strategy might work a little better... as long as he gets in there and DOES something as opposed to incessant dribbling.
                      "As a bearded man, i was very disappointed in Love. I am gathering other bearded men to discuss the status of Kevin Love's beard. I am motioning that it must be shaved."

                      - ilive4sports

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by Infinite MAN_force View Post
                        I remember reading that he was very ball dominant which scared me off after watching TJ this year. Of course with the better size and finishing ability of Evans this sort of strategy might work a little better... as long as he gets in there and DOES something as opposed to incessant dribbling.

                        I think that Tyreke Evans can be a very effective combo guard in the NBA. He obviously has the height and length to play straight 2-guard, but he also has a knack for getting some assists too. Here's a recent article I found on him:

                        http://nba.fanhouse.com/2009/04/01/c...a-point-guard/
                        Nba.fanhouse.com
                        Tom Ziller

                        Surprising no one, University of Memphis star Tyreke Evans will enter the NBA draft after one college season. Evans went into college looking for a rental, and Memphis -- under John Calipari -- served as a proper NBA training ground, featuring a pro-style offense and no expectations for top prospects to stay longer than a season. Ex-Memphis guard Derrick Rose certainly adjusted to NBA defenses rather well after a year with Calipari.

                        But while Rose definitely came to the Bulls as a pure point guard, Evans is a bit of a question mark: can he be a legitimate NBA point guard? With the league infatuated with purity in the backcourt, Evans will need to make his case during workout season that he can run a pro team against pro defenses.

                        Honestly, Evans is a quantam leap ahead of where O.J. Mayo sat this time last season in terms of draft stock. Mayo served as USC's two-guard in his one collegiate season, and while showing great shooting range and athleticism, his stint with the Trojans didn't provide a real glimpse into his "quarterback" abilities. Fate forced Evans the other way. In December, with the Tigers struggling, Calipari moved Evans to point guard. The rest would be legend if Memphis had made the Final Four: until last week's loss to Missouri in the Sweet 16, the Tigers had reeled off 27 straight wins since Evans ascended.

                        In that sense, Evans should have more to offer prospective NBA suitors than Mayo did ... and Mayo was picked No. 3 in a heavy draft. But again, Mayo shot the atoms loose at Southern Cal. Evans shot ... 27 percent from 3-point range this year. Combine that with a non-elite free throw stroke and Evans won't be the most efficient guard going. Add in his propensity to turn over the ball and ... sure, he'll score. But he'll need a lot of possessions to do it.

                        But that's OK! Look at (ahem) Dwyane Wade. In his sophomore season at Marquette, Wade averaged 27 points, 5.5 assists and four turnovers per 40 minutes. Evans averaged 24/5/5. But Wade turned 21 during his sophomore season; Evans turned 19 two months before this season began. Wade's freshman numbers are nearly identical to those of Evans (even true shooting percentage is dead close).

                        Wade isn't an NBA point guard. He's an all-Universe guard. He's a complete star. No, he doesn't have range. No, he's not an elite shooter from the charity stripe. But he's actually challenging LeBron James for the MVP title ... and LeBron is averaging 28/7/7/2 on the best team in the NBA.

                        Judging on the surface, maybe Evans can't be one of the league's best point guards. But given the similarities in the ledger he has with Wade, that might not matter.

                        (Lest I look like a Pollyanna, it should be said that Wade has also worked his flipping tail off to get where is. He didn't enter the league as DWYANE WADE. Few NBA stars work on their game harder than Wade.)

                        "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 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Can someone tell me if there are valid comparisons when the author of the article tries to draw comparisons ( at least situationally ) between Evans to Mayo or Evans even to Wade?

                          IMHO...it's kind of a stretch to say that just because Evans put up similiar #s that Wade did that he could end up like him in the NBA.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                            Can someone tell me if there are valid comparisons when the author of the article tries to draw comparisons ( at least situationally ) between Evans to Mayo or Evans even to Wade?

                            IMHO...it's kind of a stretch to say that just because Evans put up similiar #s that Wade did that he could end up like him in the NBA.
                            The short answer, IMO, is that there are no valid comparisons between players, particularly looking at a college player playing college games and comparing to someone who has actually performed on an NBA stage.

                            The comparison to Wade and Mayo are apt in that they are all basically smallish to slightly smallish shooting guards who have some playmaking ability. Wade and Mayo are bona fide NBA scorers, and Evans seems to have the tools to be. This is pretty much where it runs out of coherence.

                            Player comparisons are used to conjure images, but too often they are taken far too literally. They should be taken more in the vein of one player being "reminiscent" of another player. That is to say that there are qualities that are similar, but rarely, if ever, is there an actual equivalence.

                            Think of these in terms of fleeting glances you see of people in a crowd. For example, every day upon leaving Terre Haute, I see a billboard with a large picture of the owner of an Auto Dealership. Since it is on the periphery of my vision, my mind immediately tells me, "Why in the name of God is there a giant picture of Brianne's boyfriend Matt on 70?" This car dealer has the same general face shape, coloring, and even some shared features as Matt. However, closer inspection shows more differences than similarities. In fact, I'm convinced that if they were standing next to each other, I would consider them to look nothing alike, or at least, be easily distinguishable.

                            This is true with all player comparisons. The more you look at the two, the more differences you see. I will do it reflexively from time to time, and I'm sometimes embarrassed by the result (see: Danny's upside = James Worthy from last summer). However, it is my strong advice that you never take any of them literally. Try to figure out the piece that matches, or is reminiscent, then construct your view of the player from that. Do not allow the differences to distract from the information meant to be conveyed. Avoid, at all costs, thinking that "like" is intended to mean the same thing as "as good (or bad) as."

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by count55 View Post
                              For example, every day upon leaving Terre Haute, I see a billboard with a large picture of the owner of an Auto Dealership. Since it is on the periphery of my vision, my mind immediately tells me, "Why in the name of God is there a giant picture of Brianne's boyfriend Matt on 70?"
                              (Voice #1 in Count's head during his long commutes:

                              "Hmm, well, then again, Brianne DOES need a new vehicle ... and I know a couple people who might sell theirs ... and Matt's been a wanker lately ... good dribbler, though ... too bad he sucks on D ... he's union; I wonder if he makes more than I do ... meh, but he's getting hosed on property taxes ... and probably paying $450 a month on his car....")

                              (Voice #2:

                              Count. COUNT! Pay attention the road! Brianne got her hair cut so there's no comparison. Just relax and listen to JMV. You can do your PER revisions later tonight. Oh wait, there's a game tonight. And don't forget to pick up some milk. And don't buy it at the gas station; it's $.34 cheaper at the grocery store. I know, yes, the friendly guy behind the counter there DOES look a little like Quinn Buckner. No, you wouldn't beat Quinn in HORSE....")


                              "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                              - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Anybody have a strong opinion on Tulsa's Jerome Jordan?

                                http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jerome-Jordan-5160/

                                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jq841AbOJE

                                I've expressed my desire to move up in the draft to nab Thabeet, but I wonder if it'd be outrageous to consider Jordan a "poor man's Thabeet" and utilize him in the same way. Assuming that moving up to the top 5 (from 11 or 12) is very unlikely, then one way to examine our options is to mirror last year's approach -- acquire an additional 1st-round pick -- and estimate the group of players available at #10 and at #20. Then it'd be a matter of comparing the possible pairs: PG and (then) C/PF? SF/PF and then PG? etc. But if Jordan can legitimately be viewed as a backup to Hibbert at C and a developmental athletic, defensive PF, we might be motivated to move in the try-to-get-a-PG-first direction.

                                (I know, some of you are saying, "We should get a PG first anyway!")


                                "He’s no shrinking violet when it comes to that kind of stuff."

                                - Rick Carlisle on how Kevin Pritchard responds to needed roster changes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X