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: The Draft ???

    Originally posted by Justin Tyme View Post
    Who is this Evans who keep referring to?
    Honestly, I have no clue why I kept referring to him as Evans when it's Evan Turner. I grew up on Good Times, so that could be part of the problem.


    Remember when we could have gotten 1-2 solid players and a possible Top 3 draft pick in the 2017 NBA Draft by trading away Paul George?

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      http://walterfootball.com/nbadraft2010mock.php

      New Jersey Nets: John Wall, PG, Kentucky, 6-4, Fr.
      No matter who ends up with the first-overall pick, it's going to be John Wall. The question the Nets need to think about is what can we get for Devin Harris? There won't be room for both Wall and Harris, and the former Badger point guard could be dealt for a valuable piece.

      Think: Derrick Rose


      Minnesota Timberwolves: Evan Turner, G/F, Ohio State, 6-7, Jr.
      I think Turner is going to be as special a player in the NBA as he has been this season with Buckeyes. The Timberwolves need some help on the wing and suddenly a young core of Flynn/Turner/Brewer/Love/Jefferson along with a bunch of cap space and the draft rights to Ricky Rubio makes Minnesota a very intriguing team.

      Think: Scottie Pippen


      Golden State Warriors: Hassan Whiteside, C, Marshall, 7-0, Fr.
      The Warriors seem to be a team that drafts more on talent than need. They have a talented group of guards and wing players but need to find some consistency up front. Whiteside is loaded with potential and probably needs a year or two before he becomes a real factor, but then again the Warriors don't seem close to being a playoff-caliber team anytime soon.

      Think: Poor-man's Dwight Howard






      Sacramento Kings: Wesley Johnson, SF, Syracuse, 6-7, Jr.
      Johnson would be a definite upgrade at the three over Donte Greene and Francisco Garcia. Add him to a nice mix of Casspi/Thompson/Landry/Nocioni/Hawes and the Kings have a promising mixture of forwards for the future.

      Think: Shawn Marion


      Indiana Pacers: Derrick Favors, PF, Georgia Tech, 6-10, Fr.
      The Pacers really need a long-term solution at the point but since nobody fits that bill at this point of the 2010 NBA Draft, an athletic big is the way to go. The current crop of Hibbert/Foster/Murphy/Hansbrough doesn't exactly scream athleticism, and while Favors is still raw on the offensive end, he is a tremendous athlete with a promising future.

      Think: Al Jefferson



      Utah Jazz: Greg Monroe, PF, Georgetown, 6-10, So.
      Monroe seems like a natural fit with the Jazz. He is a fundamental big man who excels in a lot of areas on the floor. He would be a great insurance policy with Carlos Boozer unlikely to re-sign with Utah. A shooting guard would also be an option but there is no two worth taking this high.

      Think: Chris Bosh


      Detroit Pistons: DeMarcus Cousins, C, Kentucky, 6-11, Fr.
      The Pistons have a plethora of perimeter players who love to shoot the ball but lack any sort of inside presence. Cousins has been a man among boys down low at the collegiate level and would provide Detroit with a true threat inside. His attitude remains a question mark but there is no doubting his skills.

      Think: Zach Randolph






      Washington Wizards: Ed Davis, PF, North Carolina, 6-10, So.
      I am 50/50 on whether Davis will declare for the 2010 NBA Draft after suffering a season-ending injury, but for now he stays in the 2010 NBA Mock. In blowing up their roster at the trade deadline, the Wizards have a major hole up front and Davis could help fill that void.

      Think: Al Horford


      Philadelphia 76ers: Cole Aldrich, C, Kansas, 6-11, Jr.
      The Sixers have been trying to find someone to take Samuel Dalembert's contract and will likely try to move his expiring deal this summer or during the season. Aldrich would be a nice safety net and possible center of the future. He is not going to wow you with his athleticism but is very effective on the glass and as a shot blocker.

      Think: Chris Kaman


      Los Angeles Clippers: Al-Farouq Aminu, SF, Wake Forest, 6-9, So.
      In dealing Al Thornton, the Clippers will be looking for a new small forward of the future. While LeBron would be the ideal get to fill that role, the versatile Demon Deacon is a more realistic candidate.

      Think: Travis Outlaw
      @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

      Comment


      • Re: The Draft ???

        Hicks, Peck or UB......can we merge this thread with the main Draft Thread that we already have?

        I think a lot of what's discussed here is useful info....it's just that we have 2 threads talking about the same thing.
        Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          I have a feeling that we're going to end up with a 7 to 10 pick. I'd love to get Favors...but I have a feeling that we're going to continue our current mediocre play...where we still lose a lot of games....but pull of some wins here and there. Knowing our luck...we'll end up with the 10th pick. Who would be available at the 10th pick?
          Last edited by CableKC; 02-28-2010, 04:36 PM.
          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
            I have a feeling that we're going to end up with a 7 to 10 pick. I'd love to get Favors...but I have a feeling that we're going to continue our current mediocre play...where we still lose a lot of games....but pull of some wins here and there. Knowing our luck...we'll end up with the 10th pick. Who would be available at the 10th pick?
            There is no way this team is going to play .500 ball the rest of the way. How can you say current mediocre play when this team is 2-8 in the last 10? We keep that up and we win 6 games the rest of the way. BTW, the Bulls game was predictably the only one we really could win (at home, where we are almost .500, with a couple days off).

            The only way we end up in that range is if we end up around 5 by record and a couple of teams get lucky and jump into the Top 3. This team is one of the worst since the 80's. We're something like 75% of through the season and this team has shown no signs of being as good as last year's team or the year before.
            Last edited by idioteque; 02-28-2010, 04:46 PM.

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              they have the pacers picking my guy in the second round....


              Indiana Pacers: Greivis Vasquez, G, Maryland, 6-6, Sr.
              A combo guard who can handle the ball, but also plays well without it, Vazquez would add some depth in the Pacers' backcourt.
              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                I can easily see the Pacers drafting Vasquez in the second round. He's a great shooter, loves the clutch, and is an experienced college player. He sort of reminds me of a poor man's Reggie, I can see him having an NBA career like Brian Shaw or maybe a little bit better than that. He's someone that could contribute right away and play an important role for us.

                NBADraft.net has us taking Aldrich with the 6th pick, lol.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  yeah I think they could get a guy like him, he can play three positions and handle the ball, also like you said he is clutch and I think that he could be a nice leader on this team that lacks of one.
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Point guard rankings:

                    http://walterfootball.com/nbadraft2010pointguards.php

                    John Wall, Kentucky
                    Height: 6-4. Weight: 175. Year: Fr.
                    Projected Selection: #1.
                    '09-'10: 16.8 ppg, 4.1 apg, 6.3 rpg, 4.0 TOpg, 46.3 FG%, 78.2 FT%, 34.7 3-PT%


                    Eric Bledsoe, Kentucky
                    Height: 6-1. Weight: 175. Year: Fr.
                    Projected Selection: late teens/early twenties.
                    '09-'10: 10.7 ppg, 3.3 apg, 3.0 rpg, 3.5 TOpg, 44.2 FG%, 67.9 FT%, 37.5 3-PT%


                    Kemba Walker, UConn
                    Height: 6-1. Weight: 172. Year: So.
                    Projected Selection: late teens/early twenties.
                    '09-'10: 14.5 ppg, 5.4 apg, 4.1 rpg, 3.1 TOpg, 41.6 FG%, 78.0 FT%, 35.9 3-PT%

                    Armon Johnson, Nevada
                    Height: 6-3. Weight: 175. Year: Sr.
                    Projected Selection: late teens/early twenties.
                    '09-'10: 16.6 ppg, 5.3 apg, 3.2 rpg, 3.3 TOpg, 50.3 FG%, 64.9 FT%, 23.1 3-PT%


                    Tyshawn Taylor, Kansas
                    Height: 6-3. Weight: 180. Year: So.
                    Projected Selection: early twenties/late first round.
                    '09-'10: 7.4 ppg, 3.2 apg, 2.4 rpg, 1.8 TOpg, 46.1 FG%, 69.9 FT%, 36.6 3-PT%


                    Kailin Lucas, Michigan State
                    Height: 6-0. Weight: 180. Year: Jr.
                    Projected Selection: early twenties/late first.
                    '09-'10: 15.4 ppg, 4.1 apg, 1.9 rpg, 2.2 TOpg, 46.3 FG%, 78.9 FT%, 36.0 3-PT%


                    Sherron Collins, Kansas
                    Height: 5-11. Weight: 200. Year: Sr.
                    Projected Selection: early twenties/late first.
                    '09-'10: 15.1 ppg, 4.4 apg, 2.0 rpg, 2.0 TOpg, 42.2 FG%, 85.3 FT%, 37.4 3-PT%

                    Scottie Reynolds, Villanova,
                    Height: 6-2. Weight: 195. Year: Sr.
                    Projected Selection: late first/early second.
                    '09-'10: 19.0 ppg, 3.4 apg, 2.8 rpg, 2.8 TOpg, 49.0 FG%, 82.2 FT%, 40.7 3-PT%


                    Ashton Gibbs, Pitt
                    Height: 6-2. Weight: 175. Year: So.
                    Projected Selection: late first/early second.
                    '09-'10: 16.4 ppg, 2.1 apg, 2.4 rpg, 1.3 spg, 38.6 FG%, 88.8 FT%, 38.4 3-PT%


                    Greivis Vasquez, Maryland
                    Height: 6-6. Weight: 240. Year: Sr.
                    Projected Selection: early-mid second round
                    '09-'10: 18.8 ppg, 6.2 apg, 4.8 rpg, 3.3 TOpg, 44.2 FG%, 84.5, FT%, 38.8 3-PT%


                    Corey Fisher, Villanova,
                    Height: 6-1. Weight: 185. Year: Jr.
                    Projected Selection: early-mid second round.
                    '09-'10: 14.1 ppg, 4.0 apg, 2.9 rpg, 2.0 TOpg, 47.3 FG%, 79.1 FT%, 40.5 3-PT%


                    Jimmer Fredette, BYU.
                    Height: 6-2. Weight: 195. Year: Jr.
                    Projected Selection: early-mid second.
                    '09-'10: 21.5 ppg, 5.0 apg, 3.1 rpg, 2.7 TOpg, 47.1 FG%, 89.9 FT%, 48.8 3-PT%


                    Trevon Hughes, Wisconsin
                    Height: 6-0. Weight: 190. Year: Sr.
                    Projected Selection: late second round-undrafted.
                    '09-'10: 15.4 ppg, 2.8 apg, 4.6 rpg, 2.1 TOpg, 41.0 FG%, 71.0 FT%, 38.5 3-PT%


                    Jon Scheyer, Duke.
                    Height: 6-5. Weight: 190. Year: Sr.
                    Projected Selection: late second round-undrafted.
                    '09-'10: 18.9 ppg, 5.4 apg, 3.4 rpg, 1.8 TOpg, 41.6 FG%, 88.5 FT%, 39.8 3-PT%


                    Malcolm Delaney, Virginia Tech.
                    Height: 6-3. Weight: 175. Year: Jr.
                    Projected Selection: late second round-undrafted.
                    '09-'10: 20.2 ppg, 4.1 apg, 3.8 rpg, 3.0 TOpg, 39.0 FG%, 84.5 FT%, 31.2 3-PT%
                    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
                      There is no way this team is going to play .500 ball the rest of the way. How can you say current mediocre play when this team is 2-8 in the last 10? We keep that up and we win 6 games the rest of the way. BTW, the Bulls game was predictably the only one we really could win (at home, where we are almost .500, with a couple days off).

                      The only way we end up in that range is if we end up around 5 by record and a couple of teams get lucky and jump into the Top 3. This team is one of the worst since the 80's. We're something like 75% of through the season and this team has shown no signs of being as good as last year's team or the year before.
                      I'm a pessimist by nature.......so you must have missed my caveat that I included in my post...."with our luck". In this case...bad luck ( if you want to tank for a higher Lottery pick )....we'd win more games to pull us up to the 8th to 10th spot while other Teams start their own Tank mode.
                      Last edited by CableKC; 02-28-2010, 05:16 PM.
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment


                      • Re: The Draft ???

                        Originally posted by Major Cold View Post
                        OK folks. When we have cap space there won't be a NBA season.
                        And while it's away we'll be forced to invest in bulk shipments of peanuts? We'll still have cap space when it comes back.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                          Originally posted by CableKC View Post
                          I'm a pessimist by nature.......so you must have missed my caveat that I included in my post...."with our luck". In this case...bad luck ( if you want to tank for a higher Lottery pick )....we'd win more games to pull us up to the 8th to 10th spot while other Teams start their own Tank mode.
                          the only difference is that must of the teams they are playing in the next two months are teams that are fighting for playoffs, is not like they are playing GS,Minny and the Nets the rest of the way.
                          @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                            Point guard rankings:

                            http://walterfootball.com/nbadraft2010pointguards.php

                            John Wall, Kentucky
                            Height: 6-4. Weight: 175. Year: Fr.
                            Projected Selection: #1.
                            '09-'10: 16.8 ppg, 4.1 apg, 6.3 rpg, 4.0 TOpg, 46.3 FG%, 78.2 FT%, 34.7 3-PT%


                            Eric Bledsoe, Kentucky
                            Height: 6-1. Weight: 175. Year: Fr.
                            Projected Selection: late teens/early twenties.
                            '09-'10: 10.7 ppg, 3.3 apg, 3.0 rpg, 3.5 TOpg, 44.2 FG%, 67.9 FT%, 37.5 3-PT%
                            Geez.....talk about a weak PG draft this year. Ther's a HUGE chasm-like drop between Wall and the next best PG.

                            As many have continually pointed out.....maybe we should have drafted a PG last season while drafting a PF this season. t
                            Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                            Comment


                            • Re: The Draft ???

                              Originally posted by Hicks View Post
                              And while it's away we'll be forced to invest in bulk shipments of peanuts? We'll still have cap space when it comes back.
                              no just that in case we can't sign anybodywe could resign Dun,Ford and Murphy to smaller contracts to have some veterans in the team.....
                              Last edited by vnzla81; 02-28-2010, 05:50 PM.
                              @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2010 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                Yeah this draft is completely opposite then last year, when it comes to PGs. After Wall it's a significant drop-off.

                                I could see the Pacers looking at Vasquez as well. Not sure if he'll be a guy that is able to add any strength at all though. I like his intensity though.

                                There's really a lot of factors left, with a lot of basketball to be played. I need to see more of the NCAA tourney action, and then ultimately find out the Pacers worse and best case drafting position, then we can really start to narrow down choices heading into workouts and who actually declares

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X