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 owl View Post
    It seems Rubio has entered the draft.

    http://www.lavanguardia.es/deportes/...-el-draft.html

    From hoopshype
    Too bad I can't read spanish .. lol

    But anyways ...

    That is awesome.... and it is gonna be awesome for the NBA with Rubio entering the draft ...

    I still , personally , if given the chance, would take Rubio at number 1....

    Don't get me wrong, As much as I like, and think that Griffin is an absolute BEAST at PF.. And as much as I think he will immediately impact whatever team ends up choosing him.....

    I still believe Ricky Rubio , is one of those players that is so incredibly gifted , that players like him only come around once every 10 to 15 years in the NBA ..


    Even if I were a team like New Orleans with Chris Paul , I would still have a difficult time passing up Rubio ...

    To me personally ... (and this is just my own opinion) , that would be like holding an all-time nba fantasy draft, and passing up Pete Maravich in order to take Dominique Wilkins ...

    I absolutely cannot wait to be able to see Rubio play in the NBA and develop into the all star, and fan favorite I believe he will quickly become ..

    I just wish with all my heart, that a miracle happens on draft night and the Pacers were able to get him ...

    As I have mentioned before ...I have never been lucky enough to be able to go to an NBA game .. let alone an Indiana Pacers game yet .. (due to money issues)

    But If that were to happen and we drafted Rubio ... I would figure out a way to get season (half-season) tickets ... or something .. lol



    I know it is "off-topic" so mods, plz don't rake me through the coals as I am in some dire financial turmoil ...


    Seriously though ... I really wish I could afford to go to some home games. But it probably won't happen ..

    With being unemployed right now , it is hard to find money to do much of anything nowadays ..

    Speaking of employment though .. (And I REALLY hate to even mention it) ...

    But if any of you guys own your own business, or work anywhere that is hiring within at least a 30 minute to hours drive proximity to Anderson , and needs a hard worker whom will show up on time every day , PLEASE shoot me a P.M.



    ****** sorry for thread drift*******



    carry on ..
    .
    .
    "Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      I havent posted in a while and with all the playoff games I've been watching, I am itching so badly for next year to come already.. so I'd just like to share my thoughts on where we stand with this draft.


      It is VERY CLEAR to me what Bird et al. are looking for in this draft after his presser. It is also clear what Jimmy wants as well: more athleticism and size at point, size and low-post scoring with the bigs. Bird stressed that we need to get better on defense and that we never got a stop when we needed it this year, which goes without saying. He also said that if someone they like doesn't fall to them at #13, then he will take the best athlete available. Bird also recognized that JOB wants more size and athleticism at the point, but that all (but probably Evans, and he's not even a true point yet) point guards this year are undersized.

      So here is what I see our draft plan being this year:

      1. We are not taking a point guard unless Evans falls to us. I think Bird would consider him even though he's only played the point role for one year. There are a handful of very, very intriguing point guards, but they are all undersized and would struggle defensively, something we are far too accustomed to right now. But I just cant see Evans falling out of the top ten, so a first-round point guard is out of the equation.

      2. An athletic, scoring big would be most ideal, but there just aren't many out there. Assuming we don't trade up, we can just eliminate Griffin, Hill, and Thabeet. If Monroe declares, theres no way he's falling to us. This leaves DeJuan Blair, James Johnson, Craig Brackins, Patrick Patterson, Austin Daye, Gani Lawal, and BJ Mullens as potential bigs.

      I see Johnson as a tweener, and I just don't see Bird biting on him. 13 way too high to consider Daye or Lawal, though both are intriguing prospects in my eyes. Mullens could be exactly what we are looking for: a big with size and scoring ability. Problem is he sucks on defense, almost invisible during some stretches when I watched him this year, and has a ways to go in development. I think everyone here would cry if we picked him. I dont see any other lottery team biting on him either.

      This leaves us with Brackins, Patterson, and Blair as the only realistic choices for bigs for us. Brackins is a tweener almost in the mold of an Earl Clark. He can face up and take you off the dribble, or he can post you up and work from there. He has a very good offensive skill set. He can also grab a few boards with his size, length, and athleticism. But I dont think we take him because he doesnt have a natural position, he doesnt grind down low and tends to float outside, and doesnt bring enough on defense to trump the aforementioned questions and issues with him.

      Patterson and Blair are both undersized 4's with tremendous wingspans. They bring totally different games. Patterson can develop into the low-post scoring presence we need, but he lacks defensive awareness and intensity. Blair is a monster on the glass and defensive end, but he doesnt have any real post moves and no mid-range jumper to speak of. Here's how I differentiate the two: Patterson may or may not fulfill his offensive capacity at the next level, but he is undersized and he will have to overcome a lot to reach his potential. Blair is also undersized, but he will always have his defensive intensity and attacking of the glass.

      In summary, the only potential big I see us drafting is Blair. Patterson would be a good option if we were picking a little later. I wouldnt completely rule him out, but it is a longshot that we will take him.

      3. So we have established that there are no options at point and one-and-a-half options at the 4 or 5. Point guard and big man are 1 and 1a in terms of off-season wish list or needs. Since we are most likely not in a position to get either, we are most likely targeting the best athlete/talent. Here's a list of the potentials:

      Demar DeRozan
      Earl Clark
      Gerald Henderson
      Terrence Wiliams
      Sam Young
      Chase Budinger

      I want to eliminate DeRozan for several reasons. First, there's very little chance he falls to us. But even if he does, I don't like him for other reasons. He is a 6-7 super athlete who doesnt have an outside jumper, can't really create for himself, and doesnt give you anything on defense.

      Next, Earl Clark. There's a better chance of him falling to us. But he has too many question marks to his game. He absolutely owned the glass in college, but can he do the same with bigger and better athletes in the NBA... He has the length to guard the 4, but does he have the strength to hold his own on the block... He hasnt shown consistency with his jumper. He has small hands, which will be a problem when he wants to drive and attack the rim. He already had a tendency to lose control at times when driving and attacking the rim against smaller college players. He just wouldnt fit with our lineup, and he probably will be taken earlier anyway, so we can cross him off.

      13 is too high for Budinger. We've all heard that this draft is stock-piled with role players and that's about it. Budinger is the definition of a role player. His ceiling is that of a role player, he could give you 10-12 a night, and he's someone that you'll have to help on the defensive end since he will struggle defending all 2's he will face and most 3's.

      I love Sam Young's game. He can shoot, rebound, defend, but he doesnt do any of these exceptionally well, and he is both physically and mentally tough. But we have a log-jam at the wing and Sam doesnt having any thing that jumps out at you that make him worthy of a lottery pick.

      Henderson is a ridiculous athlete who can score and defend. He might struggle against bigger wings, but he is not a bad option.

      T-Will is another freak athlete, like Henderson. He is unique in that he has the point-guard-like court vision and passing ability and is the best wing defender in the draft bar none. He has HUGE question marks in his ability to shoot and finding ways to score. But good thing that scoring is the strength of our other wings (Danny, Quis, Dunleavy).

      So to summarize all of this, the following is a list (in order) that combines what the Pacers will need, who they are looking for, and omitting those we dont have a realistic chance of drafting, whether it be our pick is too low or too high for a certain player's value:

      1. T-Will
      2. Blair
      3. Henderson

      Haha.. that hardly qualifies as a list. But I just dont see anyone else that could potentially fit. This is just my take.
      Last edited by UncleReg; 04-21-2009, 08:14 PM.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Excellent, excellent post, UncleReg. Your logic & explanations are first-rate.

        We're making different guesses on who TPTB will choose, and it's anybody's guess who even "falls" to us at #13, but I agree completely with your direction of thought.


        "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

          Originally posted by UncleReg View Post

          1. T-Will
          2. Blair
          3. Henderson

          Haha.. that hardly qualifies as a list. But I just dont see anyone else that could potentially fit. This is just my take.
          I agree 100% with the 2 highlighted in bold.

          I mentioned them in another thread earlier as the 2 I thought the Pacers would target as of right now. Of course workouts could change

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by HeartlandFan View Post
            I know nothing about Brackins. But if we are to draft him, he better turn out better than the last Iowa State player we drafted.
            not to be smart... but...
            wasn't the last iowa state player we drafted Fred Hoiberg? tinsley was drafted by the grizzlies, i believe.

            the other iowa state phenom that comes to mind?? Marcus Fizer.
            "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

              Nice post UncleReg. I like your three. Pretty much my thoughts as well. I have said and will say again that T-Will could be a nice insurance policy. I guess I like the fact he is a good rebounder for a SG albeit for college. and a best Case: Poor Man's Andre Iguodal is not bad at all. It just make the most sense especially since Bird has said in his Presser he is not looking for a big to fall to us and that he would look at FA.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by Kaufman View Post
                not to be smart... but...
                wasn't the last iowa state player we drafted Fred Hoiberg? tinsley was drafted by the grizzlies, i believe.

                the other iowa state phenom that comes to mind?? Marcus Fizer.
                You're correct. My mistake. I think everyone gets my drift though

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  jrue holiday sounds like a player job/bird are describing for pg. tall, strong, athletic, and plays defense

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    any other iowa state players that come to mind though? i'm sure they've put out a few more than those three...
                    "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

                      Jeff Hornacek

                      BTW...technically, Atlanta drafted Tinsley using Memphis' pick under our instructions.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaal_Tinsley

                        even though I am pretty sure you are right from memory count 55, wiki isn't as specific, or is just simply wrong.
                        "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

                          Most of the guys here could improve the wikipedia article just off the tops of their heads.

                          [citation needed]
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            never did understand why tinsley was hated so much here. under thomas and in carlisle's early years, tinsley was arguably the pacers most valuable player yet the fans STILL hated him.

                            as for the draft, i'm sticking with my guns and wishing derozan didn't go off like he did in the pac-10 tourney or evans against missouri. i really think it's a must the pacers get one of those two, even if it means trading up...and i do still like patterson, harden, and flynn. i'd prefer to trade back to draft patterson or flynn, and we'd obviously need to trade up for harden. unless of course, he falls to us like bayless did last year.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              This is going to be a very interesting draft for the Pacers.

                              This team needs defense bad at the point guard spot and in the paint. They probably won't get it from this draft.

                              There are some nice point guards in Eric Manyor (I really like his game) but he might struggle defensively in the NBA. The same can be said for DeJuan Blair.

                              There are a lot of options for the Pacers. I think that they have to stay away from drafting based on need. I think that guys like Gerald Henderson and Terrance Williams are much much better prospects than Manyor and Blair and you have to give those guys a really strong look. Heck Henderson and Williams makes us a better team than Manyor or Blair.

                              I will say a player who has really grown on me as the college season went on is Sam Young. For most of the season I was pretty high on Blair loving his physical presence down low but I question Blair's ability to defend in the NBA especially with it being so guard dominate. Young on the other hand could end up being a big time rotation player for years to come.

                              If the Pacers stand where they are at I am hoping for Henderson, Williams, or Young. I think those are the three best prospects for them. I do not want to see this team draft based on need!

                              Even a guy like Young, taking him in the lottery is a bit of a stretch, but he has a great game and I think to last year and what a guy like James Posey did for the Celtics and those type of guys are so important to a team winning. You don't need to try and draft a star every pick there is nothing wrong with getting a guy who is a winner and will help you win for many years. They don't need a player to change the face of the franchise they just need someone to help keep the train moving in the right direction.

                              Someone else who I like is Gani Lawal. I think he has excellent potential to be a real nice defensive big down the road. If the Pacers could select a late first round pick I think he would be a great choice.

                              The only thing I would worry about if the Pacers drafted another wing is how it would affect Brandon Rush and his confidence level? I defiantly think Rush has a bright future as a Pacer I just he wouldn't start to question his future.

                              If the Pacers don't pick up Marquis option it would defiantly open the door wider for another wing player. I think that is the way to go in this draft. Clearly where the Pacers are picking they would be wise to not draft based on need.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Originally posted by rommie View Post
                                The only thing I would worry about if the Pacers drafted another wing is how it would affect Brandon Rush and his confidence level? I defiantly think Rush has a bright future as a Pacer I just he wouldn't start to question his future.
                                Drafting a wing would have nothing to do with having little confidence in Rush, and we have the room for another wing. Dunleavy is out for now. He's going to miss a good part of next season, and when he does come back, he's not going to be the same. Really, we only have three wings (Danny, Rush, Quis), and one of them can play spot minutes at the 4 (Danny). Rush is our starting SG next year, and it's his job to lose.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X