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
    JOB is the Pacer's coach and he believes players have to earn their minutes. He believe the way to improve our defense is to draft more athletic players. I have no idea what Bird's draft strategy will be.
    I get the sense that Bird is more pragmatic about drafting players ( at least compared to DW ) given our current situation for the next 2 seasons. Although I have no idea about what his "whole" strategy is.....unless some Player that they rank highly drops.....I am pretty sure that one of the requirements that he will be looking for will be that the player is NBA-Ready.

    Just like in the last Draft, I'm guessing that they'll consider Player that can contribute not as a Starter ( immediately ) but as a 7th to 9th rotational player by the end of their rookie Season ( if not by the start of their Sophomore season...after another training Camp ).

    Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
    If the Pacers draft a guard do we resign Jack, do we trade TJ, does Travis Diener walk?
    The 1st 2 questions aren't easily answered....but I doubt that Diener would walk...and if he wanted to leave....I doubt that TPTB would raise a huge concern about that.
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Draft buzz: Teams open to selling picks?

      By Chad Ford
      ESPN.com

      CHICAGO -- While the point guards were the main attraction at the combine, there was plenty of other buzz:

      • With draft day now less than a month away, a number of teams are looking to either get in the draft or grab another first-round pick.

      The Knicks are trying to use their considerable wealth (a team can pay up to $3 million for a pick) to search for a seller. They have the eighth pick in the draft, but would like another pick. With the team trying to manage its cap, draft picks are a cheap source of labor. And with the economy turning sour for NBA teams, the Knicks might seize the opportunity.

      The Rockets, who don't have a pick in the first round, are tying to get one.

      The Pacers, who are picking 13th, also wouldn't mind one more pick and shouldn't have a hard time finding a taker. A number of teams don't seem too enthralled with this year's talent and are willing to sell for the right price. The Wizards have a high lottery pick they'd consider moving.

      The Pistons at No. 15, the Hornets at No. 21 and the Blazers at No. 24 are also all willing to deal. And a few teams with multiple first-round picks -- the Thunder, Grizzlies and Bulls -- might be willing to sell, too.


      Daye
      • Gonzaga's Austin Daye continued to generate buzz -- both good and bad -- on the last day of the combine. He measured taller and longer than virtually any small forward prospect in the history of the draft. However, he also measured as the skinniest. Kevin Durant clocked in at 215 pounds at the combine two years ago. Daye? 191 pounds.

      Daye's going to be one of the more difficult players to project. He has the skill set and height of a lottery pick, but his lack of strength and questionable motor are being heavily taken into account.

      A number of teams in the late lottery to mid-first round -- including the Bobcats, Pacers, Suns and Pistons -- are all giving him a hard look right now.


      Clark
      • Daye's main competition might be Louisville's Earl Clark, who was also very impressive in drills. He measured out at a legit 6-foot-10 in shoes, has a huge 7-foot-2½ wingspan and weighs nearly 40 pounds more than Daye.

      He definitely has the size to play the 4 in the NBA, and that could go a long way toward securing him a pick in the lottery.

      While Clark isn't the shooter that Daye is, he is a better rebounder and athlete, and he's getting a pretty strong endorsement from his head coach Rick Pitino, who has told a number of GMs that Clark is a good kid and has limitless potential. He's just a follower. If he's in the right situation with good influences around him, he could be a player in the mold of Lamar Odom.

      But if he's in the wrong situation with a bad mentor, it could spell disaster.

      The Nets are giving Clark a long look at No. 11. The Bobcats and Suns are, too. I doubt he slips past the Pistons at No. 15.


      Hansbrough
      • Another player who really seems to have helped himself at the combine was UNC's Tyler Hansbrough. He has been knocked for being too short to play in the NBA, but he measured over 6-8 in socks, had a solid 6-foot-11 wingspan and a standing reach that was an inch taller than Blake Griffin's. While Hansbrough isn't the explosive athlete that Griffin is, he isn't terrible, either.

      I hear the Bulls are looking at him as high as No. 16.

      • Ohio State's B.J. Mullens continued to impress in drills, with a number of GMs comparing him to last year's second-round slider DeAndre Jordan.

      Jordan, like Mullens, began the year as a projected top 10 pick, but his lack of playing time combined with criticism from his head coach caused his draft stock to plummet all the way into the second round on draft night.

      Still, Jordan had a very solid rookie season with the Clippers, who believe he could be a Tyson Chandler-esque player in the league.


      Mullens
      Mullens' so-so play, along with some questions about his background and character, seem to be having the same effect on his draft stock. But a number of teams are now double-checking to make sure they don't let someone with his talent slip through their fingers. In a draft devoid of bigs, it's hard to imagine that Mullens, who stands 7-1 and is a very good athlete, slips as hard as Jordan did. However, his stock is very much up in the air.

      "You watch him in the combine and it's pretty easy to fall in love," one GM said. "There are a lot of raw tools there to work with. But in the interview you get the sense that it's going to be a project. I think he's a good kid, but he's got issues to work through."

      Mullens got pretty mixed reviews from his interview process, with one GM saying "He's better than you think," and another one saying "This kid doesn't get it, and I don't think he's going to get it."


      Blair
      • Pittsburgh's DeJuan Blair wowed a lot of people with his improved physique on the first day of camp. But one GM scolded Blair in the interviews for the way he was jogging up and down the floor the first day.

      "It does you no good to lose all that weight and still play like you're fat," the GM told Blair.

      Blair took the constructive criticism to heart and raced like a guard through the second day of workouts.

      • Speaking of bigs, Arizona State's Jeff Pendergraph received quite a bit of love from GMs. He measured out at a solid 6-10 and 240 pounds and showed a solid offensive game in the drills.

      A number of teams I spoke with said they thought he was a lock for the first round. He hasn't been in our first two mock drafts, but that might change Tuesday.


      Gibson
      • USC's Taj Gibson also got some buzz from the camp. Not only did he show a pretty polished inside-outside game, he had terrific measurements -- he was 6-10 in shoes and had a whopping 7-foot-4 wingspan and an impressive 9-foot-1 standing reach. With so few quality bigs in the draft, it's not impossible that Gibson finds his way into the first round as well.

      • Finally, Miami's Jack McClinton wants a do-over in the measurements. He measured under 6 feet in socks and just a little under 6-1 in shoes, which were essentially the same measurements as Syracuse's Jonny Flynn. However, McClinton insisted to me that he's an inch taller than Flynn.

      I think he's right. He went up to Flynn, they stood back-to-back and McClinton definitely looked taller. Either McClinton hunched in the measurement or Flynn stood on his tippy-toes.

      Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider.
      http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...erNotes-090601
      "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

      - Salman Rushdie

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Ranking the top 13 point guards

        By Chad Ford
        ESPN.com

        CHICAGO -- The first-ever NBA draft combine is a wrap, and the outcome wasn't as bad as many had predicted.

        No, there weren't any 5-on-5 games. And yes, several of the top players refused to participate in light drills. But the combine did provide some clarity in several key areas.

        The first -- and, arguably, the most important -- was a better understanding of the top point guard prospects. While the draft is weak overall, the point guard class is strong, and seeing all the top prospects on the floor (with the exception of Ricky Rubio and Tyreke Evans) was the most interesting part of the combine.

        Before the combine, a number of NBA executives I spoke with said they were struggling to get any real separation in the group after months of scouting. But after watching the players on the court together, getting real measurements and spending 30 minutes interviewing the players one-on-one, a number of NBA GMs said they felt more confident in ranking the top point guard prospects.

        I spoke with 15 different GMs and executives and gave them the task of ranking the top 13 point guards in the draft, including a couple of players -- like Tyreke Evans, Stephen Curry and Toney Douglas -- that some GMs see as 2-guards. I then took those 15 responses and averaged them to get a more comprehensive ranking of where each prospect fell.

        Here's a look at where they stand after the combine:

        1. Ricky Rubio (avg. 1.9)
        Rubio walked away with the vote, though it was closer than some would have guessed. He received only eight first-place votes, barely over half. Four had him as the second-best point guard in the draft, three GMs ranked him third and one GM had him ranked as low as fourth.

        There seems to be a growing number of GMs who are questioning Rubio's lack of elite athleticism, his shaky jumper and his lack of physical strength. It's still likely that Rubio is the first point guard taken on draft day, but it's no longer a guarantee.

        2. Stephen Curry (avg. 2.4)
        Curry was somewhat of a surprise as the second-place finisher, which speaks to how well he was received at the combine, where he shot the lights out, measured a little bigger than expected and looked like he fit in with the other point guards on the floor. He also was a pro in the interviews, and many of the older GMs feel the fact that he grew up around the NBA game will help him make a quick transition to the pros.

        Three GMs had him ranked as the top point guard in the draft, and he received seven second-place votes, too. One GM had him ranked sixth.

        This coincides with a number of things I heard at the camp that had the Thunder, Wizards and Warriors all looking at possibly selecting Curry before the Knicks draft at No. 8.

        3. Jonny Flynn (avg. 3)
        The straw poll also suggests that Flynn is on the rise mainly for three reasons. First, his play toward the end of the season at Syracuse gave a lot of GMs confidence in his leadership abilities.

        Second, some surprising measurements (Flynn cracked the 6-foot barrier in shoes) have helped alleviate fears about his size. It now looks like he's the same size as Chris Paul.

        Third, a number of GMs said Flynn gave the best interview of any of the prospects. His personal charisma seems to be helping him close the sale.

        Two GMs had him as the best point guard in the draft, and three others had him ranked second. His lowest score was a five.

        Flynn is getting interest from Sacramento, Golden State, New York, Milwaukee and Indiana, and looks like a lock for the lottery at this point.

        4. Jrue Holiday (avg. 3.8)
        Holiday has been the other high riser over the course of the past few weeks, and no one probably helped himself more than Holiday at the combine.

        He stacked up well against the other players physically, looked comfortable playing the point in drills, knocked down his jumper and received high marks in interviews.

        Holiday actually netted one first-place vote in our poll and garnered several second- and third-place votes. He placed no lower than fifth on anyone's list.

        With teams like the Kings, Warriors, Knicks, Bucks and Pacers all looking at him (basically the same list as Flynn), he, too, looks like he's a lock for the lottery.

        5. Tyreke Evans (avg. 4.5)
        Evans was one of just five players who skipped the drills; the word from his camp is that he's a lock for the top 10. He did measure really long for a guard, sporting a standing reach that was just one inch below Blake Griffin's.

        However, the GMs I spoke with appear to have concerns. While one GM ranked him as the best point guard prospect in the draft, no one ranked him second and only three GMs ranked him third. On the flip side, Evans got one sixth-place vote and one seventh-place vote.

        Some GMs expressed skepticism that he was a point guard and a number of them said that, until he learns to shoot the basketball better, defenses will just sag on him, limiting his effectiveness.

        A number of teams including the Wizards, Timberwolves, Warriors, Knicks, Raptors and Bobcats are giving him a serious look, but his range in the draft might be a little wider than we previously thought.

        6. Jeff Teague (avg. 6.5)
        Teague has a tough decision to make soon. While a number of GMs like him, many think he should go back to school for another year.

        His highest ranking in our poll was sixth, and his lowest was eighth. That's probably good for a late lottery to mid-first-round pick in the draft. But given Teague's talent, he could do better with a breakout season at Wake Forest next year.

        Teague's range probably starts with the Pacers at No. 13. The Sixers, Wolves, Hawks and Mavericks will also take a long look at him.

        7. Brandon Jennings (avg. 6.8)
        Jennings' numbers were the most suspect of the group. A number of GMs admitted that they don't know enough about him. And all of them were disappointed that he was skipping the Reebok Eurocamp. They felt like they needed to see him in workouts against other top prospects to get a better feel.

        One GM ranked him as the fourth-best point guard prospect in the draft, and two others had him ranked fifth. On the other end of the spectrum, one GM ranked him ninth, and four had him ranked eighth. The rest of his numbers were spread pretty evenly between sixth and seventh.

        So where will he land? Sacramento will give him a look as high as No. 4, but it wouldn't be a shock if he slipped out of the lottery.

        8. Eric Maynor (avg. 8)
        Maynor is the sleeper of the group. Every GM claims they like him, but don't love him. That might be because Maynor is one of those players who does just about everything well, but doesn't have one particular area in his game that stands out.

        Maynor drew some praise and some criticism at the combine. A few GMs said they really liked his poise and demeanor on the court. Others said his game was better suited to game situations than the drills we saw in Chicago.

        Maynor was spread out pretty evenly between seventh, eighth and ninth on most boards. Three GMs had him rated as high as sixth, and one GM had him ranked 10th.

        Maynor's range should be about the same as Teague's: starting at Indiana (No. 13) and ending at Dallas (No. 22).

        9. Ty Lawson (avg. 9.5 )
        Lawson is coming off a rough week: Some GMs didn't like him in the combine setting, he measured the shortest of any point guard in the draft, and there were questions about his conditioning and a potential toe injury. Put all that together and Lawson seems to be the one guy slipping on a lot of boards.

        Two GMs had him ranked as high as sixth on their point guard list, but a number of others had him much lower, with two GMs ranking him 10th and one GM ranking him 11th.

        10. Patrick Mills (avg. 10)
        Mills impressed some GMs with his speed at the combine, but a better test will come this weekend at the Reebok Eurocamp. Right now his targets have to be Lawson and Maynor, as he tries to move up the draft board and decide whether or not to stay in the draft.

        Mills' range was pretty even. He had one eighth-place vote and several ninth-place votes, but was ranked as the 10th-best point guard prospect on most boards. He never fell below 11th on anyone's draft board.

        11. Darren Collison (avg. 11)
        For a second straight year, Collison is being overshadowed by a teammate who averaged fewer points and assists per game than he did. He looked fine at the combine, but he's having a hard time winning any love right now.

        Collison wasn't ranked higher than 10th on any board, and was ranked dead last by one GM. It's still likely that he cracks the first round, but it doesn't look like he's going to catch anyone other than Mills at this point.

        12. Nick Calathes (avg. 12)
        Obviously, Calathes is getting more love in Greece than he is in the U.S. Panathinaikos paid him a lot of money to stiff the NBA and head to Europe. Maybe there's some backlash in the numbers, but this result is pretty consistent with what we've been hearing all season.

        If Calathes slips into the second round, it won't be a bad thing. He can earn more money when he does decide to come play in the NBA, because second-round picks are limited by the first-round rookie salary scale.

        13. Toney Douglas (avg. 12.5)
        Douglas' agent David Falk has been pushing Douglas hard, but so far it hasn't taken hold. Virtually everyone had him ranked dead last, although he did have one eighth-place vote and one ninth-place vote.
        http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft...aftTour-090601
        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

        - Salman Rushdie

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Fascinating. I'd heard of Clark almost exclusively as a SF, but 6'10" with a 7'2" wingspan and a decent weight is certainly workable for a PF.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            I whole-heartedly admit that I have read nothing about him other then from the quick snippets that I have seen here and there.....but based off of my uninformed "first thoughts" about Daye.....when I see some "very skinny but tall SF that Teams hope to mold into some rotational backup PF", I immediately think of Bender.
            Last edited by CableKC; 06-01-2009, 05:10 PM.
            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 Anthem View Post
              Fascinating. I'd heard of Clark almost exclusively as a SF, but 6'10" with a 7'2" wingspan and a decent weight is certainly workable for a PF.
              He's got the look of a Nellie player. If Nellie isn't that enthralled by any of the guards available where the Warriors draft (and I can definitely see that as being the case), it wouldn't shock me to see him want Clark.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                Fascinating. I'd heard of Clark almost exclusively as a SF, but 6'10" with a 7'2" wingspan and a decent weight is certainly workable for a PF.
                My preference is to stay away from Players that are better suited to play a certain position that "could" learn to play another position.
                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 d_c View Post
                  He's got the look of a Nellie player. If Nellie isn't that enthralled by any of the guards available where the Warriors draft (and I can definitely see that as being the case), it wouldn't shock me to see him want Clark.
                  The Warriors have gone with Tweener Forwards in the draft for the last 2 seasons with Randolph and Wright.....why not go for another one?

                  At the 7th pick......I can see them going with Evans or Holiday....taller Tweener ComboGuards that can handle the ball that are somewhat athletic. The one thing that Nellie hates is to have players on the floor that do not handle nor pass the ball very well.
                  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
                    My preference is to stay away from Players that are better suited to play a certain position that "could" learn to play another position.
                    Remember that Bird and Magic were both multi-positional players. Jordan was really a 3 position player as well (and he dominated any 3 that he played).

                    KG came into the league as a SF. Same with Dirk. Lamar Odom is a non-allstar who has had a very productive career playing multiple positions.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                      The Warriors have gone with Tweener Forwards in the draft for the last 2 seasons with Randolph and Wright.....why not go for another one?

                      At the 7th pick......I can see them going with Evans or Holiday....taller Tweener ComboGuards that can handle the ball that are somewhat athletic. The one thing that Nellie hates is to have players on the floor that do not handle nor pass the ball very well.
                      Nellie isn't a big fan of Wright.

                      Wright's strictly a one position player and his rebounding doesn't satisfy Nellie. He might view Wright as too skinny the same way he viewed Ike as too short.

                      Clark has more mass, can rebound better, can handle it, shoot it and play multiple positions. If that's not a Nellie player, I don't know what is.

                      I don't know what he's going to think of Evans or Holiday. Just remember that Nellie doesn't like undersized SGs (note that he's never fully embraced Monta).

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by d_c View Post
                        Nellie isn't a big fan of Wright.
                        Can the Pacers have him?
                        "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                        - Salman Rushdie

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                          Can the Pacers have him?
                          Nellie doesn't like Wright that much (could change if he bulks up), but it doesn't mean he's going to give him away for free. Wright still has value around the league, and Nellie will treat the situation as such.

                          I don't really see any trade involving the Warriors, Wright and the Pacers that would satisfy both teams.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            I'd give up #13 for him.
                            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                            - Salman Rushdie

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by d_c View Post
                              I don't know what he's going to think of Evans or Holiday. Just remember that Nellie doesn't like undersized SGs (note that he's never fully embraced Monta).
                              I guess it's dependant on whether one considers Evans or Holiday a PG and whether they can handle/pass the ball unselfishly.

                              The problem with any player that is drafted by Nellie is that Warrior fans better hope that he's NBA ready and has a lot of patience and confidence....or Nellie is gonna ruin what little confidence he has coming into the League since Nellie has very little patience for Rookie's making mistakes ( something that is expected in their 1st year ).
                              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
                                The problem with any player that is drafted by Nellie is that Warrior fans better hope that he's NBA ready and has a lot of patience and confidence....or Nellie is gonna ruin what little confidence he has coming into the League since Nellie has very little patience for Rookie's making mistakes ( something that is expected in their 1st year ).
                                Please note that, very quietly, the job Nellie did with Anthony Randolph this past year was one of the best coaching jobs of an individual player all year long.

                                A lot of people have no idea how far he came last season as a player, and Nellie has everything to do with it.

                                Also note that Nellie is the reason that undrafted guys like Kelenna Azubuike, CJ Watson and Anthony Morrow are even in the league. Nellie didn't seem to wreck their confidence. Morrow led the league in 3 point % and holds the single game record for most points scored by an undrafted rookie.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X