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 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

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

  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    I just spent a couple hours this morning trying to figure out some trades with trading the #10 pick. The problem many times is that in order to trade any of the 3 largest expirings with the #10 is that other teams would have to trade 3 players to match salaries, or the Pacers have to take back large longer contracts.

    I looked at teams like OKC, Milwaukee, Miami, and Minnesota in particular who would like to move up, and others as well. After looking thru some teams rosters, I was surprised to see they only have 7-8 players under contract next season.

    Another surprise was the amount of partial guaranteed salaries. One player in particular had 3 more years on his contract and every year was only partially guaranteed! I can truthfully say I've had a learning experience this morning looking at players contracts.

    I don't know much about Louis Arroyo as a PG other than he's a UFA, anyone have any info about him?

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
      I just spent a couple hours this morning trying to figure out some trades with trading the #10 pick. The problem many times is that in order to trade any of the 3 largest expirings with the #10 is that other teams would have to trade 3 players to match salaries, or the Pacers have to take back large longer contracts.

      I looked at teams like OKC, Milwaukee, Miami, and Minnesota in particular who would like to move up, and others as well. After looking thru some teams rosters, I was surprised to see they only have 7-8 players under contract next season.

      Another surprise was the amount of partial guaranteed salaries. One player in particular had 3 more years on his contract and every year was only partially guaranteed! I can truthfully say I've had a learning experience this morning looking at players contracts.

      I don't know much about Louis Arroyo as a PG other than he's a UFA, anyone have any info about him?
      do you mean carlos arroyo? If so I think he's pretty mediocre. Think Rafer Alston-esque: very flashy, dribbles a lot, but in his defense is a pretty good scorer. His defense blows.
      I think he's mostly known for almost beating team USA?
      *edit* hes definitely not the answer
      Peck is basically omniscient when it comes to understanding how the minds of Herb Simon and Kevin Pritchard work. I was a fool to ever question him and now feel deep shame for not understanding that this team believes in continuity above talent.

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        [QUOTE=HanSolo;1008174]

        do you mean carlos arroyo? /QUOTE]


        LOL, yes. I just dated myself as Louis Arroyo was a lefthanded relieve pitcher in the early 60's for the Yankees. I was a diehard Yankee fan at the time.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by count55 View Post
          I actually want Zoubek at 57. Guy can rebound, and we can send him into the opposing city the night before to terrorize the villagers and eat their babies.

          In other words, with the exception of Hibbert, I wouldn't let the fact that we've got stiffs piled up like cord wood affect my drafting decision.
          Hilarious... love the part about the cord of wood.

          Also, JT... I would assume you are talking about Carlos Arroyo? He is a pretty taloented player. Solid PG. He is a bad starter but great backup. He would be good if your team was forced into more of a platoon situation at PG. He could handle more minutes than a tradional backup, but you probably don't want him playing 40mpg. He played for Puerto Rico in the Worlds a couple of years ago and absolutely torched us. He was unstoppable for them, but obviously in a losing cause. He is a good PG, just not someone who you would consider a top 15-20 PG.
          "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
            Agreed, but Bird is going to field a team that he thinks can win games next year. It's what he's tried to do every year. That team is not going to have 7 or 8 bigs on it.

            It was the same kind of basic numerical roster analysis that led me to believe Tinsley would be gone a couple of months before the buyout was announced. You just look at the roster and notice that things are way out of whttp://www.pacersdigest.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1008136hack with one position.

            I think you're probably right about the pick being traded. I would go so far as to think that something is probably in place already, assuming player availability at the 10 spot. I just hope it's Murphy or Ford that gets packaged with the pick. It doesn't hurt my soul to watch Foster, Jones, and Dunleavy play basketball.
            I misread your original post. I agree with what you are saying.

            However, I wouldn't take a lesser wing or point over a big just because we have a bunch of bodies.

            Originally posted by D-BONE View Post
            So you are leaning more toward the vet player coming back as opposed to, say, multiple picks? You think PG most likely?
            It would be my opinion, based on the financial situation of the Pacers and where Bird is at in his tenure, that he (and Herb Simon) are much more likely to be seeking a deal like the rumored Tony Parker trade than they are trading back for multiple picks.

            However, I just don't see them just taking the BPA at #10.

            I traded e-mails with Royce Young of DailyThunder.com asking him about a trade that would basically be #10 for Eric Maynor and #21. (We'd have to throw Solo in for salary matching purposes.) He said that deal (or similar) was coming up a lot in the comments on his board.

            He thinks it's a deal that makes sense for both teams, but doesn't know what OKC would end up drafting at #10, and he also wasn't sure how willing Presti would be to give up Maynor.

            That would be another type of trade I could see the Pacers doing.

            The last resort would be trading back for multiple picks.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Originally posted by count55 View Post


              I traded e-mails with Royce Young of DailyThunder.com asking him about a trade that would basically be #10 for Eric Maynor and #21. (We'd have to throw Solo in for salary matching purposes.) He said that deal (or similar) was coming up a lot in the comments on his board.

              He thinks it's a deal that makes sense for both teams, but doesn't know what OKC would end up drafting at #10, and he also wasn't sure how willing Presti would be to give up Maynor.

              That would be another type of trade I could see the Pacers doing.

              The last resort would be trading back for multiple picks.


              That's interesting b/c I was looking at a trade this morning of

              OKC

              Maynor
              Collison... expiring vet
              #21 & 32


              Pacers

              Ford... expiring b/u PG
              #10
              #57 or Lorbek/Stanko rights

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                Can't really disagree there, as I'm fairly certain that McRoberts has a far superior offensive game. He is not (and never will be) the shot blocking force that Varnado is though. We have seen it time and time again in the NBA: If a guy has one elite skill, he generally can find a place in the league. Varnado is an elite shot blocker, so if nothing else I think he can be a 8th/9th man.
                But McRoberts has shown an outstanding ability to defend SFs after switches which is something I really like. I pointed out how a wing (I forget who now) had burned Rush with a nice upfake and then a few minutes later he got McBob on a switch and tried the same thing, except Josh was able to hold on to the floor, cut him off on the drive attempt and then smother the shot.

                I hate him at center because I don't think he has the size, much like Foster getting beat up there too, but he's a great all-around defensive PF. I'd take that over the HR blocks of Vanardo or Whiteside.

                I'd rather also add Jerome James of Tulsa even though he does wing a bit on his spins and might have to fix that. Still he's a true 7 foot guy with spins and one dribble post moves.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  I prefer Ndiaye to Zoubek, but heck, maybe you can draft one and just FA sign the other. Why not add two 7 foot guys. Ndiaye is quicker, a better shot blocker, maybe faster in transition. Zoubek is a bit smarter.

                  Ndiaye was stuck watching Rosario chuck without conscience. I think he put up a couple of 3-17 type nights. Yeesh. Zoubek got to play with a good backcourt.


                  Originally posted by wintermute
                  a 3rd string center at the 57th pick is a steal. even a guy like solo went early secound round. heck, drafting any guy who could stick in the nba a few years is a win at 57.
                  This is why I've been stumped about Ndiaye's ranking all year. I've seen him play many times. He's tall, pretty fluid and by all accounts should be on radars at least because he was #3 in the country in blocks, except that unlike Whiteside or Vanardo he was actually doing it in a powerhouse basketball conference. I mean the SEC may have had KY (though they got upset) but Tenn with it's player situation, Vandy where Olgilvy is your stud...

                  That's not the same as facing G'twon, Syracuse, Nova, WVa, plus UNC before Davis was hurt and they were ranked 9th. When Pitt and UConn are some of your easier games, you're in a tough conference.
                  Last edited by Naptown_Seth; 06-12-2010, 11:41 PM.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Originally posted by count55 View Post
                    I actually want Zoubek at 57. Guy can rebound, and we can send him into the opposing city the night before to terrorize the villagers and eat their babies.
                    I expect Indiana to use #57 to either grab a PG or C with "question marks," such as being a tweener at a position or playing out of position on his college team, or to stash away a promising foreign player who isn't ready for the NBA yet.

                    I think we actually could get a decent bench player there in this draft.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
                      I wouldn't have much of a problem with that. Zoubek would make a fine 3rd string C.

                      One thing to note is that the roster, as it is currently constructed, severely limits the amount of bigs that Bird can bring in. We've got Hibbert, Foster, Jones, Murphy, Hansbrough, and McRoberts all under contract for next year. That's already as many bigs as most teams carry going into the season. Even moving up to 7 bigs is a pretty big stretch as it leaves you thin at the other 3 positions. (I'm trying not to mention that we have a coach who has a tendency to play small at times.) So one thing you can be fairly sure of is that if we draft a big whom it looks like we're keeping, someone's likely on the way out. If we draft 2 bigs, someone's getting either cut or traded, guaranteed.
                      This is the very reason why I have some doubts as to whether the FO would even consider drafting a Big Man ( especially in a draft that is top heavy with Big Men ) even if Udoh ( who I really hope the Pacers draft ) is available to the Pacers to pick at the 10 spot.

                      The simple reality is that although it's blindingly clear that we should draft an atheltic Big Man that can rebound and block shots, we may not due to simple need. We have 6 Big Men that are all under contract...why get another one?

                      That's why there's a small part of me that thinks that the Pacers will actually reach for a PG or draft a SG/SF with the #10 pick. More importantly, that's why it makes even more sense to trade down or draft Xavier Henry at the 10 spot.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by count55 View Post
                        I misread your original post. I agree with what you are saying.

                        However, I wouldn't take a lesser wing or point over a big just because we have a bunch of bodies.

                        It would be my opinion, based on the financial situation of the Pacers and where Bird is at in his tenure, that he (and Herb Simon) are much more likely to be seeking a deal like the rumored Tony Parker trade than they are trading back for multiple picks.

                        However, I just don't see them just taking the BPA at #10.
                        I understand you're line of reasoning but this is where I agree more with Mel.

                        You're thinking of moves based off of the future and the long-term rebuilding plans....which is totally logical IMHO.....whereas it is of my opinion that this Team is in as much of a "Win and be Competitive Now so that we can get back to the Playoffs" as we are in a "Rebuild Now" situation. When you then factor in the $$$ side of this.....this only tilts my reasoning more to what Mel is suggesting.

                        I see 6 Big Men that are under contract that will likely meet our Frontcourt needs for the next season and COULD HAVE helped out this last season as well if it weren't for some freak injuries to Hansbrough and long-running injuries with Foster.

                        Despite my wish that the FO would simply acknowledge that we should build the roster for the long-term ( and therefore draft a PF/C IF he is the BPA ), I still think that they will look back and say to themselves, "Well, we already have 6 Frontcourt Players under contract....if Hansbrough and Foster weren't injured this last season...we'd be in the Playoffs....why add more to the mix?" and try to make another run at it.

                        The only thing that will change my mind is if the Pacers FO knows something more about Hansbrough and Foster then they are letting on.

                        BTW.....I'm not saying that I agree with what I think the FO is thinking....I'm just saying that I can totally see the FO thinking this way as it fits their MO as to how they have been running this Team for the last 2 seasons. It simply does not make sense to add more Players to the Front Court when we have 6 under contract. As a result, we need more help at the PG, SG and SF spots then we need at the PF/C spots.
                        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post
                          I expect Indiana to use #57 to either grab a PG or C with "question marks," such as being a tweener at a position or playing out of position on his college team, or to stash away a promising foreign player who isn't ready for the NBA yet.

                          I think we actually could get a decent bench player there in this draft.
                          I'll have to disagree with you here. Although it would be nice to think that the FO would spend 57 on a Player with potential that they can stash away and try to roll the dice on....I think that the current FO understands that this Team is so de-void of talent that they need to utilize all of their assets smartly to the best of their ability.

                          That's why we drafted Price with our 2nd round pick last season. To me, Bird is all about getting Players that are NBA-Ready and can contribute ( in some way ) immediately. I also think that he factors in what College Basketball Program and the Coach that the Player has played under. Starting from BRush to Hibbert to Hansbrough to Price....they all come from top notch College Programs that have top-notch Coaches that teach them how to play the right way.

                          This is one of the reasons why I think that if they are given the chance that they would draft Zoubek with the 57th pick. He's a Senior ( which means that he's as mature as they come ), he comes from Duke ( one of the best Programs in College ), he already has one skill that should translate well in the NBA ( he's a top notch Offensive Rebounder ) and most importantly....he's been taught and coached by one of the best College Coaches / Mentors of all time.

                          I think that Bird values all these considerations very highly.
                          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by CableKC View Post

                            This is one of the reasons why I think that if they are given the chance that they would draft Zoubek with the 57th pick. He's a Senior ( which means that he's as mature as they come ), he comes from Duke ( one of the best Programs in College ), he already has one skill that should translate well in the NBA ( he's a top notch Offensive Rebounder ) and most importantly....he's been taught and coached by one of the best College Coaches / Mentors of all time.

                            I think that Bird values all these considerations very highly.
                            I doubt Zoubek drops to the 57th pick. Maybe he does but his value just increased exponentially after that tourny run. I mean he basically showed that he could play very very solid defense and control the paint.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              Originally posted by IndyPacer View Post

                              to stash away a promising foreign player who isn't ready for the NBA yet.

                              Why?

                              We already have Lorbek and Stanko "stashed away", and I don't ever see either ever wearing a Pacers uni. Under that circumstance, I see no reason to pick a foreign player who by odds will never play for the Pacers, but select a player like N'Diaye who truly might have a decent chance of making the roster to b/u Hibbert.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                This is from official Grizzlies Twitter feed.

                                http://twitter.com/memgrizz

                                # Babbitt has nice lift on his jumper... less than a minute ago via txt

                                Xavier Henry stayed after his own workout to check out the afternoon session... 13 minutes ago via txt

                                Similar to this morning, a lot of open court drills with second group... 14 minutes ago via txt

                                Luke Babbitt, Craig Brackins, Jeremy Evans, Quincy Pondexter, Andy Rautins, Lance Stephenson.... 23 minutes ago via txt

                                Afternoon session just started... 25 minutes ago via txt

                                Henry thinks he go anywhere between six and 15... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                Henry thinks he could really fit in well with the Grizzlies... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                Anderson says that he really felt he had something to prove against Henry today... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                Anderson tells media he tried to show what he could do, but his injury is frustrating... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                Barone Sr says that the goal of today's workout was to put the players in situations that are out of their comfort zones... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                Barone Sr says that Henry showed today that he will be able to get to the basket in the NBA.. about 2 hours ago via tx

                                Barone Sr. tells media that Morgan was very impressive today... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                First workout complete about to speak with the players... about 2 hours ago via tx

                                Excellent showing from Memphis media today at workouts... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                Players worked hard but are showing some fatigue at this point of the workout... about 2 hours ago via txt

                                Henry probably the best shooter amongst today's players.... about 3 hours ago via txt

                                Robinson with a windmill dunk showing off hops... about 3 hours ago via txt

                                Xavier Henry is very smooth in the open court... about 3 hours ago via txt

                                Athleticism to spare at this workout... about 3 hours ago via txt

                                Barone Sr. joking that Tom Izzo evidently didn't let Morgan shoot enough because he's on fire... about 3 hours ago via txt

                                Mr. Heisley, Coach Hollins, Chris Wallace and Gene Bartow sitting in first row today watching workouts... about 3 hours ago via txt

                                James Anderson, Lazar Hayward, Xavier Henry, Dominique Jones, Raymar Morgan and Stanley Robinson...
                                Grizzlies keep impressing me with their draft coverage.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X